1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4147 OF 2010 1. Shridhar S/o Bala Jadhav Age : 72 years, Occ : Agriculture, 2. Chhagabai W/o Shridhar Jadhav Age : 68 years, Occ : Agriculture, Both R/o Telangshi, Tq. Jamkhed, District Ahmednagar. ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. N.L. Jadhav, advocate for applicants. Mr. D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for respondent. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 1st December, 2010. PER COURT : 1. The application is for anticipatory bail. 2. The applicants apprehend their arrests in connection with Crime No. I-188 of 2010 registered at Jamkhed Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 320, 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. Perused the recitals of the F.I.R. and Investigation 2 papers. 4. The F.I.R. Prima facie shows that the mother of deceased Mainabai suspected involvement of the applicants and their son, by name, Valmik in the alleged homicidal death of her daughter, by name, Mainabai. It is important to notice that the incident is said to have occurred on 04.09.2010. The daughter of informant was found missing. She had gone towards the agricultural land situated in the proximity of mountain but had not returned home. Her dead body was found in a well situated in the agricultural land of one Shridhar Bala Jadhav on 06.09.2010. The F.I.R. was lodged on 09.09.2010. The F.I.R. is lodged on basis of suspicion that deceased Mainabai was having illicit sexual relations with son of the applicants, and therefore was pregnant at the relevant time. It is suspected that the son of the applicant was informed by the deceased about pregnancy, and therefore, he along with the applicants eliminated her due to fear of defamation. There is no tangible material gathered during course of investigation to infer that the applicants were seen in the company of deceased Mainabai prior to her death. Nor any serious material is gathered to infer their complicity in the alleged crime. In this view of the matter, merely based on the suspicion, if they are arrested then they are likely to be humiliated without any substantial reason. 3 5. For the reasons aforestated, the application is granted in terms of order dated 18.10.2010 which stands confirmed. The application is disposed of. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri4147.10