1 Cri.A.2073.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2073 OF 2011 Ashok Gangadhar Korake ...APPLICANT. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, and another ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri. Kailas B. Autade,Advocate for Applicant. Shri. G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for Respondent-State. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail, in crime No. 36 of 2011, registered with Sonai Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for the offence punishable under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The Crime is registered on the basis of report of father of the deceased. Allegation is made that the applicant was in one sided love affair with the deceased. Allegation is also made that the applicant followed the deceased and he went to the family of the bridegroom of the deceased and 2 Cri.A.2073.11 gave false information and broke the marriage, which was settled and was to be performed on 26.03.2011. The incident took place on 20.04.2011. It is contended that parents of the deceased were in the field and when they returned to home at 6.00 p. m , they noticed that the deceased was feeling sick. On enquiry, the deceased disclosed that at about 5.00 p.m. applicant came to her house and insisted her to marry with him. She disclosed that applicant gave threats that he would not allow her to marry with any other person, as he loves her . Due to such conduct of the applicant, she had consumed poison. The Postmortem report shows that death of the deceased was caused due to poisoning. 4. Today advocate for the applicant produced xerox copy of the letter allegedly written by the deceased to the applicant. He submitted that deceased was in love with the applicant and as parents of the deceased wanted to give the deceased in marriage with other person, she committed suicide. 5. Even after perusal of this letter, it can be said that the deceased has mentioned that the applicant had deceived her on two occasions and she also felt that she would be deceived again. She has mentioned that due to conduct and spreading rumour accused was causing defamation. 3 Cri.A.2073.11 5. In view of the aforesaid circumstance, this Court hold that it is not fit case for granting anticipatory bail. In such cases, custodial interrogation is necessary. Considering the contents of the letter produced by the applicant, prima facie custodial interrogation is necessary, so the present application stands rejected. Sd/- [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK