abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4030 OF 2007 Alka Balu Gaikwad .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Vivek Salunke for the applicant. Mr.D.P. Adsule, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 31ST JANUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The applicant is charged with an offence punishable under sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and is in custody since 21st July 2007. 3. On 23rd July 2007, a First Information Report was lodged by Sachin Shashikant Kapse that a headless dead body of a woman was found in the house Sunil Tarte. In the FIR, he also stated that Sunil Tarte was a - 2 - womaniser and was not seen after the night of 19th July 2007 and therefore probably Sunil Tarte had brought the woman to his house in the night between 19th and 20th July 2007, committed her murder and absconded. The applicant has been arrested on the suspicion that she has helped Sunil Tarte in committing the murder. 4. There is no eye witness to the crime. In fact, the murder appears to have been discovered after about 3-4 days. There is no evidence of the deceased being last seen with the applicant. The principal accused appears to be Sunil Tarte who is absconding. 5. Learned A.P.P. submits that the applicant is a keep of Sunil Tarte and she appears to have helped him in the crime. He submitted that the some of the ornaments as also the skull of the body of the deceased were recovered at the instance of the applicant. Theft of ornaments, which may have been the motive for the murder, are not gold ornaments as can be seen from the subsequent examination by the jeweller. Thus, prima facie, there is no material for any motive against the applicant. 6. The applicant is a woman and is in custody for more than 6 months. The trial is not likely to commence in the near future especially when the principal accused - 3 - Sunil Tarte is absconding. There is no allegation that the applicant is likely to tamper with the evidence and would not be available for trial if released on bail. In the circumstances, in my view, the applicant can be granted bail by imposing strict conditions of attendance to ensure her presence at the trial. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER ORDER ORDER The applicant be released on bail on her executing personal bond of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each subject to the condition that the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall report to the concerned police station once a week on every Monday between 5.00 and 6.00 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial. It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima facie and the Sessions Court shall not take them into consideration while appreciating the evidence at the trial. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)