1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3622 OF 2009 1. Suresh Santram Gardi, Age-34 years, Occu-Agril., 2. Dattatraya Santram Gardi, Age-46 years, Occu-Business, Both R/o. Wadwani, Tq.Wadwani, Dist. Beed. PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Maharashtra, RESPONDENT Mr.Joydeep Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr.Y.M.Kshirsagar, learned APP for respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 09/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have prayed to release them on bail in the offence registered in Dindrood Police Station, District : Beed vide Crime No.106/2009 initially registered u/s. 302, 498(A), 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC, which was later on converted after filing of charge-sheet for offence punishable u/s. 306, 498(A), 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. 2 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for the respondent. During the course of submissions, as the notice was already issued to the respondent State, papers of investigation are made available for my perusal. 3. Perusal of the papers of investigation discloses that in the complaint lodged against the petitioners and others, an allegation was made that the deceased Mira was harassed by these petitioners and others on the basis that she was unable to conceive and has not delivered a child within 3 years of her marriage and the relatives of husband petitioner were suspecting about the chastity of deceased and on that count there were frequent quarrels between deceased and the petitioners and their family members. It is also alleged that on 29/06/2009, a message was received on the cell phone that the deceased has sustained burned injuries at Wadwani and on reaching at the place, it is noticed that the deceased was dead due to the burnt injuries. 4. During the course of submissions across the bar, my attention is drawn towards the statements recorded by the Investigation Officer of the neighbourers immediately after the offence was registered against the petitioners and others. These statements of one Ashwini and Ratnabai discloses that at the time of occurrence of the alleged incidence, the door was closed from inside which was forcibly opened and then it is found that the deceased was having burnt injuries. 3 Thus one fact is clear that at the time of alleged incidence, neither petitioners nor the relatives of the petitioners were found inside the premises where the incidence was occurred. Now it is informed to me that charge-sheet is filed in this case and the accused other than the petitioners are released on bail. The relatives of the deceased are residing at Sonpeth, Dist. Parbhani while the petitioners and their relatives are residing at Wadwani. The distance between these two places is more than 50 kms. It is urged and prayed across the bar that by putting certain conditions the accused be released on bail as they are in custody since 30/06/2009, i.e. more than 4 months. 5. A bail applications is opposed by learned APP appearing for the respondent State on the sole ground that if the petitioners are released on bail, it is likelihood that they would tamper the prosecution’s evidence. 6. Considering the fact that now the entire investigation is over and the charge sheet is filed. The offence can not be said to be one as u/s. 302 of IPC, but the offence is u/s. 306 of IPC. Considering the distance between two places where the petitioners and their relatives are residing as well as the deceased and her relatives are residing, so far as fear in the mind of respondent State that there is likelihood of tampering of the witnesses, it is said to be a mere apprehension. In the premise, the case is made out to use the discretion of this Court to release the accused on bail. In these circumstances, the application succeeds. Hence following order : 4 1. The applicants accused are hereby released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 2. After relasing on bail, the applicants accused not to contact with the prosecution witnesses and not to enter in Sonpeth, Dist : Parbhani till the trial against the applicants accused and the others will be over. 3. The application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3622-09