Cri. Apln. 1991.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1991 OF 2011 Lahu Madhav Mane, Age 45 yrs., Occu. Service, R/o. Tambri Vibhag, Osmanabad. ....Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. A.S. Bayas, Advocate for applicant. Mr. G.R. Ingole, APP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. P.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent No. 4. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 6th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed under section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code in Cr.No. 33/2011 registered with Osmanabad (Rural) Police Station for offence punishable under section 306 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. Papers of investigation were made available. Both the sides are heard. 2. The applicant is working as a lecturer in Department of Automobile in Government Polytechnic College at Osmanabad. Deceased was his student. It is the case of the complainant that on 15.4.2011 as usual after completing the practical examination, the Cri. Apln. 1991.11 2 deceased left the campus of college and there no untoward incident had taken place. The complainant, who is the uncle of deceased, has contended in the F.I.R. that on the day of incident i.e. on 17.4.2011 at about 8 a.m. deceased contacted him on mobile and he told that he wanted to have urgent talk with him. The uncle then contacted the deceased on mobile. The deceased disclosed that the present applicant was teasing him by calling the applicant as mad person. He also disclosed that the present applicant was insisting the deceased that deceased should withdraw the report given against the two students of the college viz. Ravi Gavali and Salunke, by saying that they were like his sons. The deceased further disclosed his uncle that threat was given of bad consequences if the report was not withdrawn by him. Due to such treatment given to him, he was frustrated and he wanted to finish his life. In the FIR, the uncle contended that he promised the deceased to see him and he advised him not to do any such thing. The deceased committed suicide by hanging himself on some date and then the uncle gave report against the present applicant. 3. The case of the present applicant is that the deceased was student only for one year and the applicant always made proper assessment of the test attended by the deceased. Some record is produced to show that the deceased secured good marks in the subject handled by the present applicant. It was submitted that there was no reason for the present Cri. Apln. 1991.11 3 applicant to insist the deceased to withdraw the complaint. When query was made, it was asked whether two boys are relatives of the present applicant. APP submitted that there is no such record, but they probably belong to caste of the applicant. The applicant is also relying on some record prepared by the Principle of the Government Polytechnic, Osmanabad that during enquiry made by his office, no fault was found with the applicant. Query was made and APP is asked whether any student or friend of the deceased has supported the allegations. The APP submitted that there is no such statement of student in support of the allegations made by the complainant. The papers of investigation were shown. There is statement of father of deceased in which he has mentioned that in past due to similar grievances, he had contacted the applicant and he had requested to behave properly with the deceased. The FIR was given only on the basis of so called last disclosure made by the deceased to the uncle. The offence is under section 306 read with 34 of IPC. Looking to the nature of the offence, the police need no custodial interrogation. At the most, police may collect the record of mobile in respect of the deceased and the uncle to support that there was some last disclosure made by the deceased. So, I held that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and hence, the following order. (1) The application is allowed. (2) In case of arrest of applicant in Cr.No. 33/2011 registered with Cri. Apln. 1991.11 4 Osmanabad (Rural) Police Station for the offence punishable under section 306 and 34 of IPC, he be released on PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand), subject to conditions that he is to co-operate to police during investigation. He is not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The applicant to attend the concerned police station on every Sunday between 10 am to 12 noon for the period of one month. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln1991.11