1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3757 OF 2009 Bhimrao s/o.Gulabrao Bankar, and another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.S.Ghanekar, learned counsel for the applicants. Smt.Y.M.Kshirsagar, learned APP for respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 13/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants approached this Court for their release on bail in connection with CR No.66/2009, registered in Kannad Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for an offence punishable u/s. 498(A), 304(B), 323, 504, 34 of the IPC. 2. Heard advocate for applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. As the notice of this application was already given, papers of investigation were placed in my hand at the time of submissions across the bar. 3. Considering the submissions addressed across the bar on 2 behalf of the applicants, it is not under dispute that the death of the deceased i.e. wife of the first applicant is of suicidary death. This death occurred within a period of 7 years after the marriage took place between the deceased and the first applicant. From this marriage, the deceased have got a son aging about 2 years and the entire scenario required to be considered in this background as to whether there is any just cause or is demonstrated or projected by which the deceased sustained burn injuries because it is a case of bride burning but by suicidary death. The allegations against these two applicants i.e. husband and brother in law of the deceased is that 15 days prior to the occurrence of this incidence, there was demand of Rs. 15,000/- by both of them as reflected from the allegations in the complaint. But after this statement was recorded within the span of 7 hours, one more statement appears to be recorded in which the applicant no.1 husband was given some relaxation and deceased stick up to the allegations against the 2nd applicant. 4. In the background of this facts as now the charge sheet is filed and as the offence is one u/s. 304-B of the IPC, this Court has to consider apart from the evidence of the neighbourers where and what is the direct evidence against these applicants. Here it is a case where the victim herself has given her statement as to how she was illtreated at the hands of these applicants, and if it is so, even though there are statements of the close relatives, at this juncture, there are no grounds to disbelieve or to discard the statement of the deceased 3 when she was on the death bed. If such offenders are released on bail, it will give a wrong message to the Society, which this Court do not want to pass. In the result, applications fails and following is the order : Application stands rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3757-09