jpc ba907-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 907 OF 2011 Kamal Machhindra More ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Jaydeep D. Mane, for the applicant Mrs. G. P. Mulekar, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 29th June, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Jaydeep Mane, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mrs. Mulekar, the learned APP for the States. 2. The applicant has been arrested and detained in custody in C.R. No.10 of 2011 by Mhada Police Station, District Solapur on the allegation that she , in conspiracy with the co-accused Santosh alias Bapu Maruti Havale, committed murder of her husband Machindra More. 3. With the assistance of the learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP, I have glanced through the entire charge sheet, copy jpc ba907-11.sxw 2 of which is annexed to the bail application. The prosecution case is that the co-accused Santosh and the present applicant had illicit relationship. The case is that, therefore, they both conspired to commit murder of the husband of the applicant, Machindra More. It is alleged that the said co-accused Santosh took the deceased Machindra More by a private vehicle and while on the way, at Elamwadi Pati, the said co-accused pressed the neck of the deceased and at that time, the present applicant assisted him by holding the legs of the deceased. 4. There is no material to show that the presence of the applicant at the place where the murder was allegedly committed. It is clear that the deceased had left with the co accused- Santosh and at that time, the applicant was not with them. On the next day i.e. on 14/2/2011, the applicant is said to have left her house supposedly for going to her daughter's place, but, there is no material in the charge sheet to show that she had actually not gone to her daughter's place. 5. Though it can be accepted at this stage that there were illicit relationship between the co-accused and the applicant, there does not seem any satisfactory material, suggesting or supporting the theory jpc ba907-11.sxw 3 of conspiracy between the applicant and the co-accused Santosh. There is also no material to show the presence of the applicant on the spot, where the the murder of her husband allegedly took place. The applicant is a women. She is in custody since 17th February, 2011. In the ordinary course, the trial is likely to take considerable time. Under these circumstances, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 6. The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- with one surety in like amount or two sureties in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)