1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2841 OF 2010 1. Sahebrao Rakhmaji Anap, Age-27 years, Occu-Labourer, 2. Rakhmaji Bhimji Anap, Age-65 years, Occu-NIL, 3. Dattatraya Rakhmaji Anap, Age-32 years, Occu-Labourer All are R/o.Dhanora, P.O.Songaon, Tal.Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, Mehunbare Police Station, Tal.Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon RESPONDENT Mr.N.B.Suryawanshi, learned counsel for applicants. Mrs.V.A.Shinde , learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 30/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.92/2010, registered in Mehunbare Police Station of Dist. Jalgaon. 2 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. Earlier on 23/07/2010, interim protection was granted to these applicants. 4. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Ramlal Budha Mahajan, the father of the victim on 01/07/2010, as in the morning of 30/06/2010, wife of applicant no.1 Manisha committed suicide at her parents house. It is tried to urge across the bar supported by the documents annexed with the complaint that admittedly the victim got married with first applicant on 28/04/2008. Due to some matrimonial dispute, since October 2009, she is residing with her parents. It appears that after the victim returned to her parents house, she filed maintenance proceeding against the applicants in the Court of J.M.F.C. Chalisgaon in which her deposition was recorded. From this deposition, the fact is clear that since October 2009, the victim was residing with her parents. At the end of cross examination recorded on 07/05/2010, a specific question was put to the victim by the counsel for first applicant that, “Are you ready to co-habit with the first applicant, to which she has answered in affirmative.” At the same time, she had also made a statement that no attempts were made to take her back by the first applicant. The fact remains that in the entire deposition, there is no statement about receiving phone calls for some illegal 3 demand at the hands of these applicants, during her stay at her parents house. 5. Presumption u/s. 106 of The Indian Evidence Act about the death of married woman is to be attributed if the death was occurred in the matrimonial house and will not attract if the death was occurred in the parents house of the victim, when the applicants have no control over her activities. Offence u/s.306 is to be attributed, only if before the act of suicide, there is any instigation at the hands of applicants, which did not find place in the complaint as well as in the papers of investigation. Considering all these aspects, case is made out to use discretion of this Court to release the applicants on pre-arrest bail. In the result, application is allowed. Interim protection granted on 23/07/2010, is hereby confirmed till filing of the charge sheet. Applicants to co-operate the investigation agency and to give attendance in Mehunbare Police Station, if required, on written requisition by the Investigation Officer concerned. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri-appl-2841-10