( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3289 OF 2010 Bhamabai (Bhimabai) Baburao Padile APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. B.R. Kedar, advocate for the applicant. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 24th August, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The application is for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 3. The case of prosecution is that deceased Kanchan, who was daughter-in-law of applicant Bhamabai, was being ill-treated by her husband, the applicant and the father-in-law. The marriage was performed on 19th May, 1995. On 22nd June, 2010, she was reportedly assaulted and, therefore, died in the matrimonial home. ( 2 ) 4. It prima facie appears that deceased Kanchan was found to have been mercilessly beaten up and died due to grievous injuries found on her person. There was a fatal injury on her head. Her brother lodged the FIR alleging that husband of deceased Kanchan and her in-laws were giving her mal-treatment due to failure to meet out the unlawful demands. 5. According to the prosecution, the applicant, her husband and the son had conspired to eliminate deceased Kanchan. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is old-aged woman and that, she is residing separately at Udgir in order to look after the children who are taking education. He would submit that affidavit of a person was filed to corroborate such a story, but the learned Sessions Judge did not appreciate the same. The learned Sessions Judge noticed, while rejecting the similar application, that the Inquest Panchanama disclosed multiple injuries on person of deceased Kanchan and those injuries were caused due to sharp edged weapon. Thus, there is prima facie evidence to show that deceased Kanchan died homicidal death and that too in the matrimonial home. The future defence of the applicant about separate residence cannot be considered at ( 3 ) this juncture and particularly to give her clean-chit at the premature stage. Obviously, it cannot be said that the applicant is likely to be arrested without any reason, nor it can be said that she is likely to be harassed without there being any element of her involvement in the alleged incident pertaining to homicidal death of said Kanchan. The application is, therefore, dismissed. 6. The observations made in this order may not be considered in any other proceedings of regular bail application. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln3289-10