1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1746 of 2010 Sou. Varsha W/o Hemraj Wankhede ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra, thru. P.S.O. , P.S., Ajni, Nagpur. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A.S.Parihar, A.P.P. for Respondent-State. CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, J. DATED : 06 th Decem ber , 2010 . Heard. By the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., the applicant has approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 261/2010 registered with police Station, Ajani, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Section 306 r/w 34 of I.P.C., as she is apprehending arrest. Mr. Mardikar, learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that bare perusal of the report lodged by the father of victim Dinesh Satpute would show that vague allegations are made against the applicant and one Mr. Kadu that they are responsible for the suicide of his son Dinesh. Learned Advocate submitted that the applicant is working as a Head Mistress in the school namely Haribhau Wankhede High School, Narendra Nagar, Nagpur, where the victim Dinesh i.e. son of the complainant was working as a Junior Clerk w.e.f. 01/1/2010 and on the basis of complaint lodged by the father of deceased Dinesh and one suicide note, the police authorities are behind the applicant. Learned Advocate for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is a lady and a senior teacher in the 2 school. She is having unblemished record at her credit. Learned Advocate for the supplicant submitted that recently he has received instructions that the applicant is no way concerned with the affairs of the management nor she was having any post in the management. A document is placed on record. The same is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. He further submits that in view of this fact, the applicant is entitled for protection at the hands of this Court. Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is working as a Head Mistress for last more than 5 years and there is no chance that she may leave the place of her occupation as she is residing in the same town with her family. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency as and when called. He, therefore, prayed for allowing the application. Per contra, learned Mr. Parihar, learned APP has filed the reply and opposed the application. The record is also placed before the Court for perusal. Mr. Parihar, learned APP submitted that the offence is serious and there is sufficient material on record to connect the applicant with the present crime. He, therefore, prayed for rejection of the application. Perusal of the reply and the record reveals that the complaint is made by the father of the the victim on the allegation that his son used to be under pressure constantly. It is further stated that an amount of Rs. Seven lakhs was paid for employment of his son Dinesh in the said school and there was a demand of Rs. Two lakhs more for his appointment due to which victim Dinesh was under tremendous mental pressure. The suicide note was found in the chamber of the applicant. The material on record show that the allegations are vague in nature. There is nothing on record to show that the applicant, who is Head Mistress of the school is in any way 3 concerned with the management or affairs of the society nor it is brought on record to show that the applicant was using her influence in the affairs of the administration of the school. As regards other material i.e. suicide note, at this stage, there is nothing on record i.e. the report of Hand Writing Expert etc. Arter perusal of the material and reply filed by the State, I am of the considered opinion that prima facie case is made out by the applicant. It is not the case of the investigating agency that the applicant would in any way hamper the investigation. The apprehension expressed by the investigating agency in respect of non- availability of the applicant for investigation, can be taken care of by putting the applicant on conditions. In the result, the application is allowed. The interim protection granted by this Court by order 27/10/2010 is confirmed on the same conditions as they are. Criminal Application is disposed of. JUDGE Diwale