1 Cri.Appln.No.5269/2010 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5269/2010 (Deepchand s/o Himmatrao Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.SR Sapkal, Adv. h/for Mr.VD Sapkal, Adv. for applicant; Mr.KM Suryawanhi, APP for State. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 11 th January, 2011. ... 1) Heard. 2) The husband/accused, in custody for killing his wife – Kalpana, seeks bail. 3) The accused had doubts as regards fidelity of Kalpana. He carried her on his motorcycle on 12.8.2010 to agricultural field, for which there are two witnesses, having last seen them. Another witness saw the accused coming/returning alone from the field. In the field, there was altercation, as is disclosed by accused himself and he asked his wife to fetch water from the well and in the process, he pushed her, resultantly, she was hanging, by virtue of taking support of water pipe of electric motor. The accused in his statement under Section 27 of the Indian 2 Cri.Appln.No.5269/2010 Evidence Act, pointed the boulder, which he used in eliminating his wife. The recovery of boulder is imperative, alone to be seen. However, two witnesses referred above and the terrorizing conduct of the accused does not demonstrate to release him on bail as a contrition. 4) That apart, the son, who has lodged a report against the accused, has threatened of his life by the accused,which will add miseries, if released on bail. 5) Considering the nature of accusations, bail rejected, trial expedited, to be disposed of within a year after committal of the case. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/