1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3546 OF 2010 1. Prasad S/o Ambadasrao Deshmukh Age : 28 years, Occ : Agri., R/o Ardhapur, Tq. Ardhapur, District nanded. 2. Vishwambhar S/o Ambadasrao Deshmukh Age : 22 years, Occ : Agri., R/o As above. ..APPLICANTS -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. A.M. Mukhedkar, advocate for applicants. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, A.P.P. for respondent. Mr. M.V. Ghatge, advocate for complainant. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 6th October, 2010. PER COURT : 1. This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. The applicants are the husband and brother-in-law of deceased Smt. Ratnamala. The marriage between deceased Smt. Ratnamala and the applicant no.1 was performed on 15th April, 2008. She gave birth to a male child, by name, Tinu. When she died as a result of hanging by neck, inside the matrimonial home, the minor child was aged about 12 months. 2 3. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. 4. It is explicit that the matrimonial life of deceased Smt. Ratnamala was measurable. The learned Advocate for the applicants would submit that the charge sheet has been filed and there is no material evidence to infer instigation of suicide of Smt. Ratnamala, by either of the applicant. He would submit that the applicants may be released on bail, and if so required, on putting certain conditions. 5. Perusal of the investigation papers, prima facie, indicate that the husband of deceased was causing ill-treatment to her. He and his relatives used to taunt her and used to tell her that she was unable to cook. It is alleged that they used to demand Rs. 30,000/- for digging bore-well in the agricultural land. The version of the wife of the informant and his sons, prima facie, indicate that on 17.06.2010, informant-Dadarao, who is father of the deceased, visited house of the applicants to see her. She narrated him that she was beaten up by the husband, in laws and brother-in-law due to non-fulfillment of demand for the amount. He told the applicants and their relatives that he was in financial difficulty and was unable 3 to arrange for money. He requested them that they should not trouble her but his request was unheeded to by them. The incident of alleged suicide committed by Smt. Ratnamala occurred after midnight of 18th June, 2010, somewhere around 2 a.m. of 19th June, 2010. It appears that co-incidentally one Venkatrao Deshmukh was present in the house of the applicants during the relevant night. His police statement, prima facie, shows that he noticed that the applicant no.1 was crying and calling Smt. Ratnamala. He further noticed that the applicant no.1 removed the lock of the door by using kitchen instrument called `Kadchi'. He saw that Smt. Ratnamala was hanging to rafter. It appears that she had hanged herself by means of Sari, wrapped around her leg. The statement of Venkatrao Deshmukh shows that the deceased Ratnamala was being ill-treated by the husband and his relatives. His statement further shows that in the relevant night, the applicant no.1 had beaten up Smt. Ratnamala, and therefore, she ended her life by self hanging. 6. There is prima facie evidence to show that deceased Smt. Ratnamala was being subjected to matrimonial cruelty soon before her death. Her death occurred in the matrimonial house and particularly in bed room of the house. The applicant no.1 was present in the house and had allegedly beaten up Smt. Ratnamala 4 in the same evening. There is also evidence to show that the husband and his relatives used to demand Rs. 30,000/-, which the father of the deceased was unable to spell out. It is explicit, prima facie, that Smt. Ratnamala died under suspicious circumstances and was prima facie subjected to matrimonial cruelty soon before her death, at hands of her husband. In this view of the matter, the applicant no.1-Prasad, being husband of deceased Smt. Ratnamala and there being sufficient role attributed to him pertaining to the matrimonial cruelty caused to her, while commission of suicide, is not entitled to claim liberty. Still, however, applicant no.2-Vishwambhar, who is younger brother of applicant no.1 and there are general allegations against him about the alleged matrimonial cruelty, and therefore, is entitled to seek liberty. For, there are omnibus accusations made against him about joining hands with the applicant no.1 and other relatives while making unlawful demands and causing of ill-treatment to the deceased. 7. In the result, the application is partly allowed. Applicant no.2- Vishwambhar is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing P.Bs in sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand) with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Court of Sessions at Nanded and on further condition that he shall not contact any of 5 the prosecution witnesses nor shall make any attempt to tamper the prosecution witnesses. The application to the extent of applicant no.1-Prasad is dismissed. The application is disposed of accordingly. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri3546.10