1 cri-appa-1192-10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLN. NO. 1192 OF 2010 IN CRI. APPEAL NO. 188 OF 2010 Hari Nivrutti Kale ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent .... Mr. A.P.Mundargi Sr. Adv. i/b Mr. Sandip K.Shinde Adv. for applicant Smt. U.V.Kejariwal APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 11, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned senior advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2 The applicant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 498A and 306 of IPC and sentenced to suffer RI for three years and 7 years respectively. The appeal against the said order of conviction has been admitted. The applicant is now seeking bail. 2 cri-appa-1192-10 3 The allegation against the present applicant who is the husband, is that he along with family members used to harass the deceased and they demanded Rs.50,000/- for developing their grape garden. The learned senior advocate drew my attention to the evidence of PW 1 Bhaskar who is the father of the deceased. PW 1 has stated that he had not stated before the police while reporting complaint that accused were demanding Rs.50,000/- for the purpose of development of the grape garden. 4 The learned APP stated that a quarrel took place between the applicant and Manjusha and thereafter Manjusha committed suicide. Thus, she submitted that on account of the act of the applicant, Manisha committed suicide. To support her contention, she has placed reliance on the evidence of PW 2 Tarabai who is the mother of deceased Manjusha wherein Tarabai has stated that father in law of Manjusha told that there was quarrel between Manjusha and her husband and from 3 p.m. Manjusha went away. On the next day, the dead body of Manjusha was found in a well. On perusal of evidence of Tarabai and other witnesses, I find that there is no material to show that when exactly the quarrel took place, on what issue the quarrel took place, and whether the quarrel was such as to cause Manjusha to commit suicide. 5 The learned senior advocate for the applicant further states 3 cri-appa-1192-10 that the applicant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. This statement has not been controverted by the prosecution. 6 Taking into consideration the evidence which has come on record, prima facie I find that there is no concrete material to indicate that the present applicant was directly responsible for the suicide of Manjusha. 7 Looking to all the above facts and the fact that the applicant was on bail during the trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order. ORDER 8 The applicant- Hari Nivrutti Kale be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant shall report to Vadner Bhairav Police Station once in a fortnight till disposal of the appeal. 9 Application disposed of. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]