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. 1114 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1114 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1114 OF 2009 Smt.Nayan Kaur & Anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.Pankaj J. Das for the Applicants. Mr.Rajesh More, APP for the State. Mr.Pritam P. Runwat for the Complainant. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : APRIL 4, 2009 DATED : APRIL 4, 2009 DATED : APRIL 4, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the applicants, Counsel for the complainant and APP for the State. 2. This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the applicants who are apprehending arrest in respect of CR No.I-292/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 read with 34 of the IPC. 3. The case of the complainant is that applicant no.1 is her mother-in-law, applicant no.2 is her sister-in-law. 4. Prosecution case is that both of them attempted - 2 - to have committed murder of the complainant. Initially, a case of accidental burn was filed. Initially it was stated by the complainant that she received burns while she was preparing tea. The complainant has four children. Her Husband has been arrested in a criminal case and is behind bars. It is the case of the complainant that the applicants have threatened that if the present complaint is not withdrawn by her, they would cause harm to her four children. Fortunately, the complainant survived and offence has been registered under Sections 307, 304, 326, 504, 506 read with 34 of the IPC. 5. Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant no.2 has four children and if anticipatory bail is not granted, her four children cannot be looked after by anyone. It is further submitted that the complainant in her three statements which are recorded by the police did not make any allegations against anybody and stated that she burnt accidently while she was preparing tea. It is true that in the three statements recorded by the police, the complainant had mentioned that she was burnt - 3 - accidently while she was preparing tea, however, thereafter a private complaint was filed in which the facts have been mentioned as a result of which the order was passed by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. A complaint was thereafter registered by the police. Till today, four children of the complainant have not so far returned by these applicants who are holding them for a ransom and on one pretext or other, the custody of these children is not handed over to the complainant. In view of these facts, it is not possible to consider the application of the applicants for anticipatory bail. 6. The application for anticipatory bail is rejected. The applicants are at liberty to file application for regular bail. 7. The application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)