1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4253 OF 2009 Suryanarayan Kanhaiya Singh & ors........ Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. P.R. Arjunwadkar adv. for the Applicant Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 23rd September,2009. P. C.: 1. The present applicants are father in law, mother in law and brother in law of the deceased respectively against whom along with co­accused viz. the husband, offence punishable under section 498­A, 306, 323, 504 read with 34 of the IPC has been registered. By the present application the applicants are seeking anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest at the hands of the police. Prior to the filing of application before this court, the applicants have moved the Sessions court in the matter, however on rejection of the application by the Sessions Judge, the present application has been filed. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that only vague allegations are made against the present applicants, touching the ill­treatment which is prior to the 2 year 2007. After the year 2007, the deceased was residing along with her husband separately. Hence it cannot he said that the applicants could have responsible for physical and mental ill­ treatment meted out to the deceased. True it is that there are no specific allegations against the present applicants in regard to demand of money from the deceased or in regard to the physical ill­treatment. However allegations are made that the present applicant and the husband have treated the deceased with physical and mental cruelty touching the demand of Rs. 2 lacs for purchase of a flat,. 2. The learned APP on the other hand submitted that though the present applicants were residing separately from the deceased and her husband, the applicants used to frequently visit the residence of the deceased and that provided an opportunity to ill­ treat the deceased. It is also pointed out from the order passed by the Sessions Judge, that the statement of neighbourers are recorded which goes to substantiate the case of the prosecution that the applicants were regularly visiting the residence of the deceased. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, in my view, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. In the result the application is rejected. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)