1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1293 OF 2010 Prakash s/o Venkati Chavan Applicant. V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra. Respondent. Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Nandedkar, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent. CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 7TH MAY, 2010. PER COURT :- 1. Heard Mrs. S.S. Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Nandedkar, learned APP for the respondent-State. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking bail in connection with CR No.111/2009 registered with Nanalpeth Police Station Dist. Parbhani for the offences punishable under Section 307, 302, 326, 324 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Since the applicant was arrested thereunder on 16.07.2009 and is in judicial custody at present. 2 3. It appears that offence has been registered on the basis of dying declaration of the complainant/victim namely Sharda Vishvanath Pawar, recorded on 15th July, 2009. The applicant is son-in-law of the complainant/ victim namely Sharda and name of the applicant’s wife i.e. daughter of complainant Shardabai is Rukmini. It is alleged that divorce had taken place in between the applicant and Rukmini and Rukmini was residing with her mother i.e. complainant namely Sharda. It is also alleged that on 15.07.2009 at about 01.30 a.m when the complainant/victim was asleep in her house, the applicant entered into house along with his friend Machindra and assaulted Rukmini by edged weapon into her stomach and when the complainant went to intervene, the applicant assaulted her also by knife on her back and waist as well as when small girl Durga also tried to intervene, the applicant assaulted her by edged weapon on her left thigh and thereafter both of them fled away. 5. On perusal of the investigation papers and after considering the rival submissions advanced by both learned respective counsel for the parties, it is apparent that initially offence was registered under sections 307, 326, 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code but since the complainant namely Sharda succumbed to the injuries on 17th July, 2009 said offence was converted into offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code. 6. Accordingly, it appears that applicant has committed murder of 3 his mother-in-law due to matrimonial disputes with his wife Rukmini. Statement of Rukminibai and Durga have been recorded during the course of investigation. Durga and Rukminibai are eye witnesses to the occurrence of incident and their statements apparently connect the applicant with the alleged crime. It is also seen from the investigation papers that incriminating weapon i.e. knife was discovered at the instance of the applicant under memorandum of panchnama on 18th July, 2009. 7. In the circumstance, it is apparent that the charges leveled against the applicant are of serious nature and apparently there is incriminating evidence against the applicant and although investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed, considering the seriousness of the offence, it is not desirable to enlarge the applicant on Bail. Besides that there is possibility of tampering of evidence and / or influencing upon the witnesses, if applicant is released on bail and therefore also present application deserves to be rejected. 8. In the result, present application being sans merit stands dismissed. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. ) ...... aaa/1293.10