- 1 - 693 rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 693 OF 2011 1. Sou.Amruta Amit Umavane 2. Sou.Shashikala Laxman Marathe ..Applicants vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr.R.D.Survayanshi for Applicants Mr.K.V.Saste APP for State CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J DATE: 20 th August 2011 P.C. 1. The Applicants seeks anticipatory bail in crime No.I-327/2011 registered at Mahatma Phule Chowk police station, Kalyan for offences under sections 498A,406,311,323,504,506 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants and the learned APP. Perused the FIR and other relevant documents. The report lodged by Kanchan on 22.7.2011 show that on 1.3.2011 she was married to Vijay Laxman Marathe and valuable articles were also given as gift at the time of marriage. 10 to 15 days after marriage she was abused and ill-treated by her - 2 - 693 mother-in-law and sister-in-law. The mother-in-law and the husband began demanding Rs.2,00,000/- for construction of a house and on refusal she was mentally harassed and was forced to leave the house. At about 7 p.m. because of pregnancy she started vomitting. Her husband and mother in law forced her to consume some tablets at the house. The medical certificate dated 26.5.2011 issued by Dr.Vinod Punjabi shows that she had undergone medical termination of pregnancy on 24.4.2011. At that time she was pregnant for 8 weeks. The Complainant has alleged that her husband and mother-in-law were making allegations against her character. This is reflected in ground (f) of the present Application also stating that she was married on 1.3.2011 while she aborted on 24.4.2011 when she was pregnant for eight weeks, indicating that she was pregnant before marriage. It is contended that it was not disclosed before marriage that she was already pregnant and thus a fraud was played. 3. After considering the allegations made in ground (f) of the Application, the complaint of the wife and medical report prima facie, I find substance in the allegation of the complainant that - 3 - 693 she was harassed by making serious charges against her character. It is well known that period of pregnancy is to be counted from the date of last menses. She was married on 1.3.2011. and pregnancy was terminated on 24.4.2011. If counted from the date of marriage, eight weeks would be complete on 25.4.2011 and if period is to be counted from the date of her last menses, it is clear that she had become pregnant from this marriage but the husband and mother-in-law made false charges against her and therefore, prima facie there is reason to believe that they must have forced her to abort and therefore, a case under section 313 IPC is serious, even if other sections are not taken into consideration. In view of this, Applicant No.2 who is mother-in-law, does not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. As far as Applicant no.1 is concerned, she is the sister-in-law. She is a young lady aged 24 years and has a small child. There is no allegation in the complaint that applicant no.1 had forced the complainant to abort. In view of the circumstances, the Applicant no.1 may be granted anticipatory bail. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, in the event of - 4 - 693 arrest in Crime No.I-327 of 2011 the Applicant No. 1 Amruta Amit Umavane be released on her executing P.R. bond of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with the condition that she shall make herself available to the police as and when required, after sunrise and before sunset, for the purpose of interrogation. She shall fully cooperate in the investigation and shall not tamper with evidence. Application to the extent of Applicant no.2 stand rejected. J.H.BHATIA, J