cra3323.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3323 OF 2011 Govindrao Lakhmaji Borole, Age-55 years, Occu:Agriculture, R/o-Chidguppa, Tq-Humnabad, Dist-Bidar, Karnataka State. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Bhagyanagar Police Station, Nanded. ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.Ruturaj Patil Advocate for Applicant. Shri.B.J. Sonawane, A.P.P. for Respondent. Shri.Sandeep S. Deshmukh Advocate for the Complainant. ... CORAM: T.V. NALAWADE, J. DATE : 11TH AUGUST, 2011 cra3323.11 2 PER COURT : 1. This Application is filed for bail in C.R. No.I-339 of 2010 registered in Bhagyanagar Police Station, Dist-Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 306, 498-A, 34 etc. of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The papers of investigation were made available. Both the sides are heard. 2. The previous Criminal Application bearing No.95 of 2011 is rejected by the other Bench of this Court by holding that at that stage it was not possible to grant bail to the Applicant. The bail was refused on 2nd February, 2011. Charge- sheet came to be filed after passing of the order by the other Bench of this Court. 3. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by father of deceased. The deceased cra3323.11 3 was doctor and she was given in marriage to one Balaji Telang on 1st March, 2009. Present Applicant is husband of maternal aunt of the husband of the deceased. Allegations are made that the husband and his relatives including present Applicant, were making demand of 50% expenditure which the husband was expected to incur for construction of the hospital. Allegations are made that due to this demand, ill-treatment was given to deceased and husband was even giving beating to the deceased. Allegations are made that last disclosure about the ill-treatment, was made on 16th December, 2010 when the deceased, present Applicant, husband of the deceased and other relatives attended the marriage at Chandrapur. Allegations are made that at that time also the demand was repeated. 4. The Advocate of the Applicant pointed out that the statements of neighbours are not supporting. There are some statements of the cra3323.11 4 colleagues of the deceased, they are to the effect that the deceased was appearing unhappy. There are statements of brother and other relatives of the deceased that there was ill-treatment, there was demand and deceased used to disclose about the ill-treatment. The papers of investigation show that the police recovered one chit, which is allegedly suicide note left behind by the deceased. This chit and the admitted handwriting are sent to the handwriting expert. In this chit, the deceased has not blamed anybody. She has contended that she could not improve herself and for her suicide nobody should be blamed. 5. It was submitted for the Applicant that he is resident of Karnataka State and his place of residence is situated at a distance of 250 k.m. from the matrimonial house of the deceased. It was submitted that in Criminal Application No.3020 of 2011, this Court has granted relief of bail even to father in law of the deceased and case of the cra3323.11 5 present Applicant is on better footing. It is submitted that there is no possibility of absconding and in view of the status of the prosecution witnesses, there is no possibility of tampering with the witnesses. 6. Before the other Bench of this Court, probably there was no sufficient material, probably the suicide note was also not there. Further, the Application was rejected when the charge-sheet was not filed. In view of these circumstances and aforesaid circumstances, this Court holds that bail needs to be granted to the Applicant. The Applicant he behind bars since 18th December, 2010. 7. The Criminal Application is allowed. The Applicant is to be released on bail in C.R. No.I-339 of 2010 registered in Bhagyanagar Police Station, Dist-Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 306, 498-A, 34 etc. of the cra3323.11 6 Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, on his furnishing P.R. and S.B. of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand). He is not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. [T.V. NALAWADE, J.] asb/AUG11