1 ABA-842.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.842 OF 2011 {For Anticipatory Bail} Virendra Ramprasad Singh & Ors. .... Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Shri A.H.H. Ponda for the Applicants. Ms S.D. Shinde, APP, for the State. Ms Meena Pandey for the Complainant. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: OCTOBER 14, 2011 P.C: 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by husband and in-laws of one Deepmala who was married to applicant No.3 Vijay in 2004. The victim has a son who was born in the year 2006. On 26-9-2011 the victim died and the cause of death, as shown in the post-mortem notes, is death due to constriction of neck. The victim's father gave a report on 28-9-2011 after he came from his native place in Azamgarh District in U.P., alleging that right since the marriage the victim was subjected to ill-treatment on account of 2 ABA-842.11 unfulfilled demands of money. 2. The learned counsel for the applicants may be right in submitting that since the incident took place seven-and-half years of marriage, there may be no presumption that the death was on account of any such ill-treatment for unlawful demands. However, the report of the first informant itself shows that demands were persistent and regular. The learned counsel for the applicants also submitted orally that there may be suicidal streak in the family of the victim since the victim's father's mother committed suicide by jumping in a well. The victim's aunt, that is the father's brother's wife committed suicide by setting herself on fire and the victim's elder sister also committed suicide when she was found to be pregnant when she was not married. Now this does not show any suicidal streak as such, since the victim's uncle's wife would not come from the same lineal descendancy and therefore her commission of suicide would have nothing to do with the victim's suicide. As far as the sister is concerned, she allegedly committed suicide because she was found pregnant before marriage and that may be the cause and therefore it cannot be said that there is any 3 ABA-842.11 suicidal tendency in the family of the victim. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant also relied on the observations of the Supreme Court in Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of A.P., reported in 2010 All MR (Cri.) 615 (SC) where the Court had held that there could be several causes for commission of suicide like hyper- sensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences, etc., and unless there is some positive act of provocation, abetment could not be intended. There cannot be any doubt about this proposition. However, at this stage, when the investigation is still going on, it would be improper to speculate as to what course the investigation would take. Considering the gravity of the offence, particularly in the context of the fact that the victim is stated by the autopsy surgeons to have died due to constriction of neck, it would be improper to admit the applicants to anticipatory bail. The police would obviously take the extreme step of arresting the applicants only if the arrest of the applicants is found necessary for investigation. The application is rejected. 4. Needless to say, the observations made herein are only for the purpose of deciding the 4 ABA-842.11 present application and shall not be considered by any Court while deciding any application to be filed by the applicants. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)