1 ABA-825-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 825 OF 2011 Shri Prakash Nathuram Chavan ... Applicant (Orig. accused No.5) vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. A.P.Mundargi, Senior Counsel, i./b. Mr. Rahul S.Kate,Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP for the respondent - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 12th October, 2011. P.C. 1. The applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No. 137 of 2011 registered at Umbraj Police Station for the offences under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. To state in brief, the present applicant is the Sarpanch of Village Perale as well as the Chairman of the Managing Committee of the Zilla Parishad in the Village. The old tin sheets of that school were replaced by new sheets and the old sheets were stored. Deceased Sanjay Raghunath Thorat had made a 2 ABA-825-11.sxw written allegation that the said old sheets were misappropriated by the Sarpanch. All the 85 sheets are still lying in the school premises and they have not been misappropriated. It appears from the FIR lodged by Aabaso Pandurang Kolekar, brother-in-law of the deceased Sanjay Thorat, that said Sanjay Thorat had made that allegation falsely under pressure from the Head Mistress Vaijayanti Mane and others. Later on, he was under pressure from the present applicant to withdraw that statement. The Sarpanch had also asked him to go on leave for a few days and he would set right the matter. One Mansing Chavan, who was member of the Panchayat Samiti, had also threatened deceased Sanjay and had collected amount of Rs.5,000/- to settle the matter. Because of this, he was under pressure and finally he committed suicide by jumping into the well. His decomposed body was found in the well. As per the FIR, he had committed suicide because of the pressure from six persons, namely, Janardhan Kadam, Pratap Vishnu Chavan, Janardhan Baburao Suryavanshi, Mansing Chavan, Head Mistress Vaijanti Mane and Sarpanch Prakash Chavan. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant contends that there is no material to establish even prima facie that the applicant had in any manner abetted suicide. He also contends that out of six persons named as accused in the FIR, Janardhan Kadam, Janardhan Suryaanshi and Pratap Vishnu Chavan were on one 3 ABA-825-11.sxw side and they were allegedly pressurizing the deceased not to change the statement, while the applicant Prakash Chavan and Head Mistress Vaijanti Mane were allegedly pressurising him to change the statement and Mansing Chavan had allegedly received amount of Rs.5,000/- from him by giving threats to settle the matter. He contends that as per the FIR, three different groups were working with cross purpose and there could not be any common intention between the rival groups, but still the case under Sec. 306 read with Sec. 34 of IPC was registered against all these persons. Out of these six persons, four persons are already granted anticipatory bail. Mansing Chavan has been arrested. 4. Learned APP contends that post mortem report does not reveal the cause of death and according to him, in the order rejecting the application for anticipatory bail, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has observed that the police is not sure whether it is a case of murder or suicide. The Viscera has been referred to the C.A. and report is yet to be received. The body was found petrified.. Therefore, the cause of death is not yet known. Anyhow, the police has not registered the offence under Sec. 302 of IPC. The case is only registered under Sec. 306 of IPC. 5. In view of the facts noted above, prima facie, it becomes clear that 4 ABA-825-11.sxw deceased, under pressure from some persons, had made false allegations against the present applicant that he had misappropriated. The old tin sheets are still lying in the school premises. He was being pressurised by some persons not to change that statement while he was asked by the applicant and the Head Mistress to change the statement. The only allegation against the present applicant is that he had asked the deceased to go on leave for about 10 days and he would settle the matter. Besides that, there is no material against the applicant. In view of these circumstances and the political rivalry involved in the matter, I find that custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not necessary for investigation of the case. 6. Therefore, in the event of arrest in Crime No.137/2011, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties to make up that amount with condition that he shall make himself available to police as and when required for the purpose of interrogation and shall fully co-operate in the investigation. Initially, the applicant shall appear at the Police Station on 17th and 18th October, 2011 from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. for interrogation and thereafter as and when he may be required. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)