1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1228 OF 2010 Dattatraya Madhukar Nagarkat, Age-34 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Sainagar, A/p.Sangamner, Tq.Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.R.K.Temkar, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.B.V.Wagh, learned counsel for respondent (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 23/04/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.165/2009, registered in Sangamner City Police Station of Dist. Ahmednagar, wherein the applicant was arrested on 15/01/2010. After rejection of his first bail application, this is a second round, by which the applicant has moved this Court for his release on bail, in the change of circumstances, as now the charge sheet is filed on 12/03/2010 in the Court of J.M.F.C. Sangamner, vide RTC No.100/2010. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant followed by the 2 submissions of learned APP for State. Also perused the papers of investigation. 3. It is not under dispute that the victim is the first wife of applicant, whose marriage took place in the year 1994-95. It is also not under dispute that the victim was issue less. She was also medically treated, but as there was no success in the treatment, by consent of the victim, second marriage of applicant was performed. The alleged incident occurred on 05/12/2009, as the victim committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her person and succumb to death. Just before the incident, the second wife of applicant have delivered a male child. Due to that, the applicant and his family members are teasing the victim, as she is issue less. As the applicant succumb to death, on the complaint of her father, an offence was registered against applicant. 4. Considering the submissions across the bar, as well as the papers of investigation placed in my hand, it reveals that the death of victim is un-natural death. As the offence is registered about this incident, as the death is suicidal, at this juncture, the Court need not consider whether this death is homicidal or accidental. The only question require consideration is that whether this is a case of abatement to commit suicide and in this relation, if the statement of the neighbourers as well as the relatives are perused, it appears that there is some dispute between applicant and victim, as she is issue less, but because of that dispute, it can not be said that the 3 applicant forced her to commit suicide. The possibility can not be rulled out that in depression, the victim might have committed suicide, as the second wife of the applicant delivered the child soon before the incident, but that inference or otherwise conclusion to be drawn after an opportunity to be given to the prosecution and defence to lead their evidence at the time of trial. As the witnesses examined in this case are close relatives of victim, there are no chances that these witnesses will be tampered at the hands of applicant or his family members. As the investigation is over and charge sheet is filed, and the offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or death, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. In the premise, following is the order : 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. After released on bail, applicant not to contact the prosecution witnesses and not to leave the local jurisdiction of Sangamner City Police Station, without prior permission from the concerned Investigation Officer or the Criminal Court. 4. Application stands disposed of in terms of above order. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/MAR 2010/cri.appl.1228-10