1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3121 OF 2010 Fulabai w/o Uttam Chigure Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. S.M.Vibhute, advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the Respondent CORAM: A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 11 th August, 2010. P.C.: 1 By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for her release on bail in connection with CR No.18/10, registered in Ashti Police Station, District Jalna, for the alleged offences under Sections 498A, 304-B, 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in which, applicant came to be arrested on 17.03.2010. In the said crime, after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and after passing necessary committal order, the trial is committed to the Court of Sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No.139/10. 2 2 As the investigation is over and charge sheet is filed, heard Counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for Respondent- State. Also perused the papers of investigation. 3 From the post mortem notes, after conducting autopsy on the body of deceased Seema w/o Bharat Chigure, it appears that, according to the medical opinion, probable cause of death of deceased was, “due to asphyxia due to strangulation. Thus, it is clear that death of the deceased is not natural but is an unnatural death. At this juncture, it is risky to conclude or infer whether the death is homicidal or suicidal. 4 From the recitals in the complaint as well as statement of witnesses recorded during the investigation, dead body of deceased was found in hanging condition at the matrimonial house. The incident allegedly occurred on 11.03.2010 in the matrimonial house of Seema, which is situated at Ladakdara, Tq. Partur, District Jalna, whereas, maternal house of deceased is Shahpur, District Beed, which is situated around 80 Kms away from the place where the alleged incident took place. Present applicant is mother-in-law of deceased Seema. There are allegations of illtreatment against the applicant and husband of deceased and it is suspected that even though dead body of Seema was found in hanging condition, initially Seema was murdered by these applicants for not satisfying their illegal demands by the parents of deceased Seema and a scenario was created that she 3 has committed suicide by hanging. Other than the injuries noticed by the Medical Officer as noted in column no.17 of the post mortem notes about the ligature marks which were found on the throat above the cartridge, no other external injuries were noticed on the person of deceased. It is to be noted that from the post mortem notes, at the time of alleged incident, deceased was carrying of five months. Perusal of the entire papers of investigation discloses that there is no direct evidence as to how Seema expired due to hanging, then the case rests on circumstances. As the death occurred in the matrimonial house, there is presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act against the persons those are residing in the same place as to how Seema sustained death. At the same time, it is to be noted that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the statements of one Laxmibai and her husband, who are neighbours of deceased, disclose that on the fateful day, they saw husband of deceased and applicant – mother-in-law of the applicant present in the house in the afternoon around 12.30 to 2.30 p.m. and thereafter left for agricultural work in their field. This is the only circumstance appeared against the present applicant. If it is so, considering age of the applicant and as now investigation is over, it is not desirable that the applicant to be detained behind bars for uncertain period till trial against her is over. In the premises, application deserve the following order: ORDER 4 (a) Criminal Application is allowed. (b) Applicant Fulabai Uttam Chigure be released on bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs.Twenty thousand) and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount. (c) After released on bail, applicant not to contact the prosecution witnesses. (d) {It is hereby made clear that the observations in this order cannot be claimed as ground of parity if bail application is moved by the husband of deceased Seema; as well as the trial Court not to influence by these observations while conducting trial against the applicant.} (A.V.POTDAR) JUDGE ******* adb/criapln312110