1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3656 OF 2011 1) Madhav s/o Bhau Wabale age 65 years, occ. Agril. & service, 2) Sau. Venubai Madhav Wabale, age 63 years, occ. Agril., 3) Sau. Lanka Dattatraya Wabale, age 30 years, occ. Agril. All r/o Pimpalgaon – Wagha, Tq. Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ...Applicants VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, 2 The Superintendent of Police, at Ahmednagar ...Respondents ..... Shri N.C.Garud, advocate for applicant nos. 1 to 3 Shri G.R.Ingole, A.P.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 7th September, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose and heard respective learned 2 counsel for the parties finally. 2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 to 3 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under C.R. No. I-127 of 2011, registered at Nagar Taluka police station, District Ahmenagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Mrs. Mangal Sakhahari Karle i.e. mother of the victim, namely Supriya. 4 Apparently, although the incident of death by falling in the well of victim occurred on 13.7.2011, the first information report came to be lodged on 19.7.2011 and no explanation has been given for the said delay of about 6 days. 5 Moreover, although the names of the applicants have been reflected in the first information report, no specific role has been attributed to them, and apparently, there are no specific 3 allegations in respect of the alleged illtreatment and unlawful demand at the hands of the applicants herein to victim Supriya and it appears that there are general and omnibus allegations in that respect. Moreover, the contents of the first information report, apparently, are silent in respect of alleged abetment/instigation by the applicants to victim Supriya to commit suicide. 6 Apart from that, learned counsel for the applicants pointed out that applicant no.1 Madhav Bhau Wabale, who is father-in-law of the victim, is about 65 years and he is disabled person having the disability of 40 per cent and certificate to that effect has been annexed at Exh.’C’ collectively. Moreover, it is also submitted that applicant no.2 Sau. Venubai Madhav Wabale, who is mother-in-law of victim, is about 63 years old and she is also suffering from asthma and certificate to that effect is annexed at Exh. ‘C’ collectively. It is also canvassed that applicant no.3 Sau. Lanka Dattatraya Wabale, who is sister-in- law of victim, is having two small children, who are about 3 years and 1½ years respectively. Besides, it is also submitted that the husband of the victim, namely Sampat as well as his brother 4 Dattatraya are already in custody. 7 Having the comprehensive view of the matter and considering the accusations made against the applicants herein, it appears that there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants for further progress in the investigation, and hence, they are entitled for anticipatory bail. 8 In the result, present application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3, under C.R. No. I-127 of 2011, registered at Nagar Taluka police station, District Ahmenagar, they be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each, with one surety in the like amount by each of them, on the following conditions :- (i) The applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 shall give attendance before the concerned investigator on every Tuesday and Thursday between 3.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet, and shall cooperate in the investigation. 5 (ii) The applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. 9 It is made clear that the above observations are prima facie in nature and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. 10 The present application stands disposed of finally. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3656.11