1 crap3897.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3897 OF 2011 Santosh s/o Pandhari Tatwade, age 35 years, occ. Labour, r/o Togari, Tq.Deoni, Dist. Latur ...Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, through police station Deoni, Tq. Deoni, Dist. Latur ...Respondent ..... Shri J.M.Murkute, advocate for applicant Smt. R.K.Ladda, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 19th October, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose as well as heard learned counsel for the parties finally. 2 crap3897.11 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking regular bail, in connection with C.R. 94 of 2010, registered at Deoni police station, Tq. Deoni, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 498-A, 494 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of complaint lodged by complainant, namely Shilabai @ Shridevi Tatwade on 9.12.2010. The applicant herein is the husband of the complainant. 4 On perusal of the contents of the complaint, it appears that the applicant and the complainant married with each other about 7 years back and there are allegations against the applicant and in-laws in respect of harassment and illtreatment meted out to the complainant by them. It is also alleged that when the complainant had gone to her parental house, since she was fed up with the illtreatment and harassment by the applicant and in-laws, and the applicant herein without the permission of the complainant and behind the back of complainant, and during the subsistence of the first 3 crap3897.11 marriage, married with another woman, namely Ushabai. It is further alleged that on 8.12.2010 at about 5.00 p.m. the applicant demanded Rs.50/- from the complainant for consuming liquor, but the complainant declined for the same, and therefore, the applicant quarreled with her and stated that he had another wife and the complainant was not required, and hence, poured rockel from the can on her person and lit the matchstick and set her ablazed and attempted to kill her. 5 Admittedly, two statements of the victim Shilabai have been recorded by police personnel on 8.12.2010 and 9.12.2010, respectively, which, apparently, are in consonance with each other. Moreover, it appears that during the course of investigation, statements of other witnesses, including the neighbourers have been recorded, which, apparently, are in tune with the contents of the complaint. Besides, the match box in question, was discovered at the instance of the applicant under the memorandum panchanama on 9.12.2010. Moreover, the injury certificate of the complainant, namely Shilabai discloses that she sustained 63 per cent superficial deep burns. It is submitted that the said victim is still under medical 4 crap3897.11 treatment. 6 Admittedly, the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed, but considering the incriminating evidence against the applicant, it is apparent that there is strong prima facie case against the applicant. Moreover, since the applicant is the husband of the complainant and since there are allegations against the applicant that he has married with another woman, namely Ushabai, the apprehension is posed that there is danger to the life of the complainant, if the applicant is released on bail, and same cannot be overlooked. 7 Hence, having the comprehensive view of the matter, it is not desirable to enlarge the applicant on bail, although the charge sheet is filed, and hence, present application deserves to be rejected. However, simultaneously, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, liberty is required to be granted to the applicant to apply for expeditious hearing, after committal of the case to the court of Sessions. 5 crap3897.11 8 In the result, present application lacks merits, and therefore, stands dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to apply for expeditious hearing after committal of the case to the court of Sessions. 9 The present application stands disposed of finally. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3897.11