1appln-2161-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 2161 of 2010 Smt sahar Banu Hafizullah Momin and anr. vs. the State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr M.K. Kocharekar, for the Applicants. Mr Y. M. Nakhawa, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 1ST JULY, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this regular bail application preferred by both the applicants for their release on bail during the pendency of the trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with section 34 of I.P.Code. The applicant No.1 is paternal aunt of husband of the deceased whereas the applicant No.2 is mother-in-law of the deceased. 2. Deceased got married with one Ashfaq some time in the year 2005. In the said joint family there were about 8 to 10 family members staying along with the present applicants. It is alleged that when the victim woman was visiting her parents, she use to make complaints regarding ill treatment and harassment. On 18.8.2007 the victim died while she was at home and when her mother visited the 2appln-2161-10 place, she could notice some strangulation marks around the neck of the dead body of her daughter. However, immediately she did not lodge any complaint. The dead body was buried as per Muslim rituals. After two days the complainant – mother of the victim, went to a nearest police station and expressed her suspicion as to foul play played by the family members and other relatives to do away with her daughter. Thereafter, police machinery took suitable action and after obtaining necessary permission from the Government officials, dead body was exhumed and postmortem was conducted. In the postmortem, apparently, there are certain injuries which were noticed as antimortem. However, in the medical certificate as to cause of death given earlier prior to burial of the body, no such injuries were mentioned. Probably this has resulted in implicating the said Medical Officer and who is also the accused in the present case. 3. So far as the present applicants are concerned, there are sweeping allegations against them along with other family members and co-accused that they used to ill treat and harass the deceased and at time she was not given proper food. 4. In the present matter, the other co-accused, two other women, were granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court, Thane whereas the father in law of the victim was granted regular bail by this Court. However, probably the reason for granting such bail as stated by the learned A.P.P. for the State is the separate stay of those respective applicants and not in the joint family. 5. Mainly considering the allegations as to general statements regarding illtreatment and harassment meted out by all the family members to the deceased and considering that present applicants are in custody for more than two years, the 3appln-2161-10 present application can be allowed. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Bail application is allowed. (b) Both the applicants in C.R. No. 51/2008 with Nizampura, Police Station, Bhiwandi, shall be released on bail on executing a P.R.bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-each with one surety in the like amount each. (c) On availing the bail the applicant shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses in any way. (d) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (A.R.JOSHI,J)