{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4096 OF 2009 Geetabai w/o Sanjay Borkar Age-25 years, Occ-Household R/o Zopadpatti, Basamba Tq & Dist-Hingoli APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Basamba Dist-Hingoli RESPONDENT ....... Mr.Vivek M.Lomte, Advocate for applicant Mr.B.J.Sonawane, APP for the respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 2nd December 2009 PER COURT: 1. By way of filing the present application, the applicant has prayed to release her on bail in connection with CR No. 63/2009 registered with Basamba Police Station for an offence punishable u/s 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, followed by the submissions of learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation, carried out till today. 3. It appears that one Laxman was found dead in hanging condition on 8th September 2009 in his hut. On the basis {2} of report lodged by the father of the deceased, an ADR came to be registered in the police station. It appears that thereafter, on 25th September 2009, the brother of the deceased has lodged a complaint on suspicion that the deceased was having illicit relations with the applicant and his brother might have been killed by her and her husband. On the basis of said compliant an offence u/s 302 r/w 34 of the IPC came to be registered at CR No. 63/2009. Pursuant to the said complaint, the applicant came to be arrested on 25.09.2009 and since then she is in jail. 4. It is urged on behalf of the applicant that there is no direct evidence to connect the applicant with the death of the deceased. It is urged that this is not a case of direct evidence. It is also urged that initially, after the death of the victim, an ADR was registered and after a gap of 17 days, this offence has been registered. It is also tried to urge that the dead body was found in the hut of the deceased himself and not in the premises of the applicant. It is urged that the applicant is a lady and material investigation is over and hence she be released on bail. 5. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that the applicant is an accused in the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. The Postmortem notes indicate that the cause of death is asphyxia due to hanging. It is mentioned in column No.17 that {3} only ligature marks are found and no other injury was found. Considering the probable cause of death, there are two possibilities, i.e. either the death is suicidal or homicidal. However, at this juncture, it cannot be positively inferred that the death is homicidal, as the dead body was found in the residential premises of the deceased. In the premise, circumstantial evidence require to be scanned to ascertain as to whether there is prima facie evidence against the applicant. Statements of the witnesses only indicate that some quarrel took place between the applicant and her husband and the deceased at about 11.30 a.m. on 8th September 2009, i.e. on the day of the incident. Thereafter no witness has came forward to state that the deceased was seen in the company of the applicant and her husband to set up the theory of last seen together soon before the dead body was found. The incident occurred in the day time and in the hut, surrounded by other huts. In the premise, case is made out to exercise discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail. 8. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on her furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln4096-09