{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1885 OF 2010 Pramod Raghunath Shinde Age-25 years, Occ-Agri R/o Undegaon, Tq-Aundha Nagnath Dist-Hingoli Presently residing at Durgsawangi, Tq & Dist-Hingoli APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through police station officer Police Station Aundha Nagnath Tq-Aundha Nagnath, Dist-HIngoli RESPONDENT ....... Mr. H.V.Patil, Advocate for the applicant Mrs.V.A.Shinde, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 10 th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.15/2010 registered with Aundha Nagnath police station for an offence punishable u/s 306, 498-A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is informed that the applicant is arrested on 03.02.2010 and after completion of the {2} investigation charge sheet has been field on 29th March 2010, however, the case is not yet committed to the Court of Sessions. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. 3. Perusal of the papers of investigation indicates that the deceased Dhrupada, who was wife of the applicant, had married with the applicant on 25th December 2008. It is alleged that after the marriage there was constant illegal demand of Rs.35,000/- from the parents of the deceased for purchase of motorbike, however as they were labours they could not satisfy the said demand. It is further alleged that the alleged incident took place on 30th January 2010, as on the said day deceased has committed suicide by jumping in a well and hence the offence is registered on 01.02.2010 against the applicant and his parents. 4. Admittedly, the parents of the applicant are already released on bail. 5. During the course of the investigation statements of the witnesses are recorded which includes statements of close relatives of the deceased, which supports the allegations against the applicant, as alleged in the complaint, however the statements of the neighbours do not support the same. Apart from it soon before the alleged incident there is no demand on the part of the {3} applicant or there is no apparent overtact by the applicant soon before the incident. Bearing in mind this fact coupled with the fact that now the investigation is over and in view of the fact that the accused reside in a different village and there is no possibility of tampering of evidence, the applicant deserves liberty. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail in connection with CR No.15/2010 registered with Aundha Nagnath police station, on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. The applicant is directed not to contact or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. The applicant is also directed not to leave the local jurisdiction of the concerned court without previous permission in writing from concerned court. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1885-10