1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1267 OF 2010 Vitthal s/o Nandu Chavan & ors. ...Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Smt. A.N.Ansari, advocate for the applicants Shri S.G.Nandedkar, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 19th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Smt. A.N.Ansari, advocate for the applicants and Shri S.G.Nandedkar, A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application for anticipatory bail preferred by applicants herein apprehending their arrest under CR No. M-2 of 2010, registered at Badnapur police station, District Jalna, for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 324, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the private complaint lodged by the complainant Mr. Sanjay Kisan Rathod before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jalna on 29.8.2006 and the learned Magistrate directed to investigate the matter under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 9.3.2007 and accordingly first information report was registered on 6.3.2010 under C.R. No. M-2 of 2010 alleging that deceased Savita, who was the daughter of applicant no.1 Vitthal had love affair with the complainant Sanjay Rathod, which was opposed by the applicants herein, and therefore, she was tortured, physically and mentally, by the applicants in collusion with each other and thereby aided, abetted and instigated victim Savita to commit suicide on 28.3.2006. 4 On the afore said background, learned counsel for the applicants pointed out that C.R. No. 62 of 2006 has been already filed against the complainant herein, namely Savita Rathod in respect of the said incident of committal of suicide by Savita and charge sheet has also been filed therein and R.C.C. No. 338 of 2008 has been filed and same is pending. 5 Learned counsel for the applicants also urged that although the incident occurred on 28.3.2006, the complainant herein has filed the complaint against the applicants after the lapse of about five months i.e. on 29.8.2006 and implicated all the family members i.e. applicant nos. 1 to 12 herein in the said offence, including victim 3 Savita’s grand father therein i.e. applicant no.9-Nandu Chavan herein. Hence, in view of the said position, apparently it appears that there may be false implication of some of the applicants in the present offence and such possibility cannot be ruled out. 6 Besides that substantial period of four years has been elapsed from the date of incident i.e. 28.3.2006, and therefore, apparently there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants herein. 7 In the circumstances, present application is allowed and the interim protection granted to the applicants on 1.4.2010 stands confirmed and it is directed that in the event of her arrest of the applicants in connection with C.R. No. M-2 of 2010, registered at Badnapur police station, District Jalna, they be released on bail on each of them furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount by each, on the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when required on written intimation to them and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly or indirectly. 4 8 Needles to state that the afore said order shall be in force till filing of the charge sheet. 9 The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap1267.10