1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4665 OF 2010 1. Prabhudas Narayan Patil Age : 65 years, Occ : Nil, 2. Lilabai Prabhudas Patil Age : 60 years, Occ : Household, 3. Sushant S/o Prabhudas Patil Age : 21 years, Occ : Education All R/o Chaitraban Colony, Mahabal, Jalgaon, Tq. and Dist. Jalgaon. ..APPLICANTS -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. S.A. Pradhan, advocate for applicants. Mr. N.H. Borade, A.P.P. for respondent. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 18 th November, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. 2. The learned Advocate submits that there is no prima material to connect the applicants and as such their arrest is not necessary. Considering the recitals of the F.I.R. and other relevant material, I find it difficult to countenance the arguments. 2 3. The F.I.R. itself shows that the death of Yogita occurred within a period of three years of the marriage and she committed suicide in the matrimonial home. The applicant nos.1 and 2 are the in laws and the applicant no.3 is the brother-in-law of deceased Yogita. The F.I.R. prima facie purports to show that the demand of Rs. 50,000/- was put forth by the husband and the applicants towards remaining part of the dowry amount and after that was satisfied, another demand was put forth for payment of donation amount to get admission to B.Ed. course for Yogita. It is argued that the suicide note was found by the side of the dead body of Yogita and her suicide note demonstrate that she did not blame any one for her death. The authenticity of suicide note is yet to be verified. The defence of the applicants can not be taken into account at this juncture. 4. The learned Advocate submits that the applicant no.3 Sushant is a student and his engineering examination is scheduled, and therefore, on compassionate ground, he may be granted protection under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It would be appropriate to grant temporary protection to applicant no.3-Sushant in view of the fact that if arrested, his educational career is likely to be ruined. 3 5. Considering the reasons stated herein before, the application of the applicant nos.1 and 2 is dismissed, whereas, it is partly allowed to the extent of applicant no.3-Sushant, who is directed to be released on bail on furnishing Bail Bonds in sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) in the event of his arrest. The period of protection granted to applicant no.3-Sushant will be of six weeks and within which, if any tangible material is found against applicant no.3-Sushant, the prosecution will be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail. 6. The parties to act upon the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court Shirestedar. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri4665.10