1 Cri.Appln.No.672/2011 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.672/2011. (Prakash s/o Taru Chavan Vs. The State of Mah.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Smt. SS Jadhav, Adv. for applicant; Mr.VH Dighe, APP for State. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 7 th March, 2011. ... 1) Heard. 2) The accused/applicant Prakash, husband of Yamunabai, in – custody from 16th October, 2010 in connection with Crime No.I-380/2010, registered at Pathardi Police Station, district Ahmednagar, seeks bail. 3) The counsel for the applicant/accused submits, the other accused persons, with virtually identical role, are released by this Court, vide Criminal Application No.4972/2010 and 4632/2010. The additional role, according to the Counsel, attributed to the applicant is, he is husband of deceased Yamunabai, charge sheet is filed on 12th January, 2011. 4) Dead body of Yamunabai was found floating in Government owned well, 1 km away from residence of the accused/applicant. It was submitted by the complainant that the accused/applicant and his other family members were persistently indulging in demand and were harassing deceased Yamunabai on trivial issues. 5) Learned APP submits, there was no in time communication of missing of Yamunabai, though it was expected of the accused, being husband. 2 Cri.Appln.No.672/2011 6) The marriage between the couple is solemnized on 6th September, 2005 and the incident has taken place on 16th October, 2010. When the deceased was allegedly missing, a report to this effect was promptly lodged with the police. For that purpose, the accused/applicant Prakash, as husband, – could not be blamed. The post-mortem notes do not indicate of any injury of the assault to the deceased, her ear lobes were effected due to nibbles by maggots, but not by any other assault. 7) Nothing is to be recovered from him, he hails from the village, the witnesses are from other village, least chances of influencing the witnesses and jumping the bail. Hence order. 8) The applicant/accused Prakash s/o Taru Chavan, be released – on his furnishing PR bond and surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand). 9) The applicant/accused after his release, shall attend the court proceedings scrupulously, shall not influence the witnesses from in-laws, or visit places of their residence till conclusion of trial. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/