(1) CRI.APP. 3969.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3969 OF 2010 1. Bhausaheb S/o Maharudra Aaglawe Age : 20 years, Occu.: Labour 2. Maharudra S/o Balwant Aaglawe, Age : 70 years, Occu.: Nil, Both Residing at Garadwadi, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar Now residing at Gaikwad Jalgaon Tq. Georai, Dist. Beed .. Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurnagabad .. Respondent --- Mr. G.K. (Naik) Thigale, Advocate for the Applicants Mr. N.H. Borade, A.P.P. for the respondent-State --- CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The Application is for bail. 2. Allegedly, deceased Sharda was residing with the applicants in a common house. The applicant no.1 is her husband and the applicant no.2 is father-in- (2) CRI.APP. 3969.2010 law. She had complained about outraging of modesty by the father-in-law and also that the husband was having extra-marital relations. When she made such complaints the applicant no.1 (husband) assaulted her. She threatened that she would commit suicide and had gone to reside with her parents thereafter. About eight days prior to the incident she had returned to the house of the applicants after the father-in-law expressed regrets and apologized for his acts. On the day of incident there was a fracas between the spouses because allegedly she had not cooked vegetables. At the end of fracas, the deceased wife of the applicant no.1 threatened that she would commit suicide by self-immolation. It is alleged that the applicant no.1 thereafter flung a burning match-stick on her person. Soon she was engulfed in the flames of fire and lateron died as a result of the burning injuries. 3. Learned Advocate for the applicants, seek withdrawal of the Application to the extent of the applicant no.1. He however submits that the Application of the applicant no.2 may be granted (3) CRI.APP. 3969.2010 inasmuch as role of the applicant no.2 is not shown in the context of the alleged culpable homicide of the deceased. 4. Having heard the learned Advocate, the learned A.P.P. and on perusal of the investigation papers, it is amply clear that the alleged incident, involving the deceased in the relevant noon was result of the bickerings between the spouses. The applicant no.2 was not directly concerned with the bickerings which sparked off due to the non-cooking of the vegetable by the deceased. The applicant no.2 was allegedly involved in outraging of the modesty of the deceased. It appears that he had apologized and was granted pardon. With the result, the deceased had returned to the house of the applicants before about eight days of the alleged incident. 5. Under the circumstances, the applicant no.2 does not, prima facie, appear to be the accomplice of the applicant no.1 in relation to the incident of alleged culpable homicide. (4) CRI.APP. 3969.2010 6. In the result, the Application of applicant no.1 Bhausaheb is dismissed as withdrawn. The Application is partly allowed to the extent of applicant no.2 Maharudra and he is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand) to the satisfaction of the Court of Sessions. The Sessions trial be expedited. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp