..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1990 OF 2008 Sou.Nandini Prashant Deshmukh. ..Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. ... Mr.A.P.Mundargi, Adv. for the applicant. Mr.S.R.Shinde, APP, for the State. ... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 22nd July, 2008. DATED : 22nd July, 2008. DATED : 22nd July, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.175 of 2008 of Sangola police station. The said case is under Sections 498-A, 306 r/w. 34 of IPC. 3. The applicant is the sister-in-law of the deceased i.e. she is wife of brother of husband of the deceased. In the FIR it is stated that the other accused and the applicant used to taunt and ..(2).. harass deceased Jyoti on the ground that her father had given cheap goods during the marriage. Thereafter Jyoti passed B.Ed exam. After she passed her B.Ed exam the other accused and the applicant started harassing her on the ground that she should bring Rs.6 lakh from her father so that they could secure a job for Jyoti. Jyoti informed this fact to her father. Hence the complainant went to the matrimonial house of Jyoti and explained to her in-laws that he did not have the said amount of money. After 4-5 days of the said incident, Jyoti committed suicide. The FIR and the other material on record clearly implicates the applicant. 4. In my view, the material collected by the prosecution in the present case is such as to point out an accusing finger towards the present applicant. The Apex Court has observed in the decision of Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Directorate of Enforcement Vs. P.V.Prabhakar Rao, P.V.Prabhakar Rao, P.V.Prabhakar Rao, reported in 1997 SCC (Cri.) 978 1997 SCC (Cri.) 978 1997 SCC (Cri.) 978 that when the material gathered by the prosecution is such as to point out an accusing finger towards the accused, it is not a fit case to grant ..(3).. anticipatory bail. Hence I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Application for anticipatory bail is rejected. 5. On request of the learned Counsel for the applicant, time to surrender is granted upto 31st July, 2008. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)