1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3184 OF 2010 1 Narendra @ Suryakant s/o Ankush Gadhave age 23 years, occ. Business. 2 Gangasagarbai w/o Ankush Gadhave age 55 years, occ. Agril & household 3 Ramlal s/o Arjunrao Gadhave age 43 years, occ. Service All r/o Wadigodri Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna. Applicants VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra 2 Superintendent of Police Jalna, Tq. & Dist. Jalna. Respondent Mrs. Sadhana Jadhav, advocate for the applicants. Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 18 th August, 2010. P.C.: 1 By the present application, applicant no. 1, husband of Snehal, applicant no. 2, mother-in-law of Snehal and applicant no. 3, distant cousin 2 of applicant no. 1 are seeking anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime no. 132/2010 registered in Gondi Police Station, Dist. Jalna for the alleged offence under section 307, 498-A r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 Record shows that application was moved initially on 12 th August, 2010. On that day, applicants were protected by interim order of interim anticipatory bail. 3 Today, when the application came up for final hearing, heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP for the State. While considering the submissions, certain facts which are not under dispute require some serious consideration. Victim Snehal is the daughter of one Ankush Wayal. This Ankush is the real brother of applicant no. 2. It is not in dispute that this Ankush expired about 10 years back. At that time, Snehal, daughter of Ankush was minor. It appears, assurance was given by the second applicant to the deceased that he is not to worry of his daughter and further assured that after the minor will attain majority, marriage of the first applicant, son of second applicant will be performed with Snehal, daughter of Ankush. It is also not under dispute that somewhere by the end 3 of year 2009 or in the beginning of the year 2010, said Snehal attained majority. At that time, mother of Snehal, Sujata, met applicant no. 2 to remind about the assurance given to her deceased husband. Applicant no. 1 to keep assurance given by her, agreed to marry first applicant with Snehal. Accordingly, on 22 nd May, 2010, Snehal married with first applicant, Narendra. It appears, in that marriage, applicant no. 3, distant cousin of the first applicant also played a role of mediator. After marriage, on the next day, Snehal came to reside with applicant nos. 1 and 2 at her matrimonial house. As per the custom prevailed in the area where these applicants and Snehal were residing, on 24 th May, 2010, Snehal returned to her maternal house. On the very next day on 25 th May, 2010, she returned to the residence of the first applicant alongwith her grand mother. On 26 th May, 2010, Satyanarayan Pooja was performed in the matrimonial house of Snehal. In that night, Snehal feeling uneasy started vomiting and loose motions. Immediately, it was informed to her parents i.e. mother Sujata who is residing in the place situated hardly at 20 to 25 minutes away from the residential premises of first and second applicant. After local medical advice was taken from the medical practitioner at Wadigodri, Snehal was brought in the Kamal Nayan Bajaj hospital, Aurangbad where she was treated till 9 th June, 2010. During said medical treatment, it appears that Snehal had consumed 4 poison. 4 After discharge from Kamal Nayan Bajaj hospital on 9 th June, 2010, Snehal accompanied her mother to her residential premises. Thereafter mother of Snehal, Sujata, insisted these applicants to take Snehal back. First and second applicants considering the incident took place in the evening of performance of Satyanarayan Pooja which as per the custom was performed immediately after 3 to 4 days after performance of marriage, requested Sujata to keep Snehal with her for some days and after she will settle, Snehal to be sent to her matrimonial house. It appears that mother of Snehal insisted to take back Snehal immediately for which these applicants were not agreed. It appears, because of the same, complaint came to be lodged by Snehal in Gondi police station on 23 rd of June 2010. On the basis of this complaint Crime no. 132/2010 came to be registered for the alleged offences against these applicants. 5 It is contended across the bar on behalf of these applicants that considering the allegations levelled against these applicants in the FIR, no offence is met out under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. To attract offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, it is contended that if it 5 an act of forceful administration of poison at the hands of these applicants, then at the time of admission of Snehal in Kamal Nayan Bajaj hospital at Aurangabad or when the local medico treated her, Snehal might have disclosed this fact to the medico. There is 28 days delay in lodging FIR. Considering the manner in which the alleged incident occurred, it cannot be inferred that Snehal was forcefully administered poison, as alleged, by these applicants. 6 While opposing this submission, it is contended across the bar by learned APP for the State that during investigation statement of one Tanaji is recorded. This Tanaji met Snehal when she was taking treatment in the hospital. According to her, this statement of Tanaji discloses the contends of FIR that Snehal was forcefully administered poison at the hands of these applicants. 7 Considering these submissions, the fact remains as it is that there is delay of 28 days in filing the said FIR. It is to be noted that after the alleged incident, while Snehal was treated by the local medico as well as in Kamal Nayan Bajaj hospital at Aurangabad, she was cautious. She has not disclosed this fact about attack on her life by these applicants, and if it is so, 6 no history of poisoning is recorded or disclosed to the medico at the time when Snehal was treated, then merely on the ground of some disclosure to Tanaji, the statement of Snehal cannot be taken as truth. 8 Considering the present scenario in the society about marriages against the wishes of the newly married couple resulting in such type of contingencies and tragedies, in such situation, if the newly married bride is sent for cohabitation to her matrimonial house with her husband, it will create further critical situation. Bearing in mind this fact, it is to be inferred that the case is made out to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail on certain conditions. In view of this fact, this application deserve the following order : ORDER A Application is allowed. B Interim protection granted on 12 th August, 2010 is hereby extended till filing of the charge sheet. During meantime, if required, applicants to give attendance in Gondi police station at the written request by the Investigating Officer concerned. 7 C During this period, applicants not to leave local jurisdiction of Gondi police station without previous permission in writing from the Investigating Officer. D Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( A.V.POTDAR ) JUDGE dyb/criappln3184.10.odt