1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1228 / 2010 (Sanjay Manik Bedalwar vs . State of Maharashtra ) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. P. S. Jaiswal, Advocate for applicant Mr. C.N. Adgokar, APP for Respondent -State. Mrs. Smita Taksande Adv. for complainant. CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 30 th August, 2010. Smt. Smita Taksande, learned Advocate prays for permission to assist the learned APP as she is representing the complainant. Permission granted. Criminal Application, which is put across the Bar, is allowed. 2. Heard respective counsel at length and perused the police papers minutely. 3. By means of this application, the applicant prays for grant of bail in respect of Crime No.120/2010 registered at Pratapnagar Police Station, Nagpur for offence punishable under sections 498A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. It appears that Vijaya (now deceased) tied the marital knot with the applicant on 6.11.2009, however, the marital bliss did not last long. After their 2 marriage, Vijaya went to reside with the applicant at Panjan Railway Station Quarters in Nashik District. Vijaya was brought back to Nagpur and made to stay with her mother-in-law since 2nd March 2010. On 5th March 2010, the applicant went back alone on the pretext that he has to undergo training at Bhusawal. On 13.4.2010, the mother-in-law of Vijaya took her back to her parents’ house. 5. The unhappy circumstances which were jotted down by Vijaya in her personal diary, is also evident in the complaint made to police prior to the registration of FIR in this case. It appears that sleuths of Crime Branch, Nagpur was also informed about the facts and circumstances in respect of the marital discord and unsuccessful marriage. Myriad reasons have been enlisted by Vijaya who, as mentioned above, used to write down her feelings in her diary. Perusal of the notes do indicate prima facie involvement of the applicant and other family members, which inevitably led Vijaya to take the extreme step. According to her, she was facing precarious situation for variety of reasons as a result of marital spats and unhappy married life, culminating in mental cruelty, that she was driven to commit suicide. Allegations were made against her to the effect that she is suffering from cerebral malfunction; was not good in appearance, unable to cook food properly. That, her husband had first brought her back to Nagpur with her mother-in-law some time in April,2010 who took Vijaya 3 to her parents’ house. It also appears that earlier to the death of Vijaya, she was sent a notice by the applicant through an Advocate on 9.4.2010 accusing her that she did not lend a helping hand in the household chores and is shirking the responsibility as daughter-in- law and that she had indulged in lawful and high handed acts. It is contention of the applicant that she had left the matrimonial home, whereas it was otherwise, that mother of the applicant had taken Vijaya back to her parents' house on the pretext that she will be brought back. The bellicose intention was clearly expressed in the notice that the applicant did not wish to continue her as his wife any more and called upon her to enter into judicial separation by mutual consent. 6. Under these circumstances, the earlier prayer for grant of regular bail was outrightly rejected by the learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge-3, Nagpur. The accusations that the applicant by making allegations drove Vijaya to commit suicide and abetted commission of suicide, which attracts penal provision under section 306 IPC, which is punishable with imprisonment to the extent of 10 years and fine. Furthermore, since Vijaya died within 7 years of their marriage (in this case within few months of their marriage), presumption under section 113-A as to abetment of suicide by married woman as enacted in the Indian Evidence Act, would also come into play against the applicant. 7. For the reasons mentioned herein-above, I am 4 not prepared to take a different view of the matter, than that taken by the learned Judge of the Court below who rejected the bail on 17.7.2010, particularly bearing in mind that of late, such cases are on rise with alarming rate in the society; and charge-sheet is yet to be filed. However, the applicant is at liberty to apply for bail on merits, after charge-sheet is filed in the trial Court. Application is rejected. JUDGE Sahare