1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2623 OF 2010 1. Shivaji S/o.Rama Chavan, Age-65 years, Occu-Labour, R/o.Kali Mati Tanda, Ghatangra Area, Tq.Gangakhed, Dist. Parbhani 2. Sau.Kalubai Shivaji Chavan, Age-60 years, Occu-Labour, R/o. As above. 3. Sanjay Shivaji Chavan, Age-25 years, Occu-Labour, R/o. As above APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.S.T.Veer, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.K.S.Patil, learned APP for State Mr.A.S.Londhe, learned counsel for original complainant. CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 27/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have prayed this Court for their release on bail in connection with CR No.32/2010 registered in Pimpaldari Police Station of Dist. Parbhani, in which these applicants came to be arrested on 31/05/2010. After their 2 attempts became futile before the Lower Courts, they are before this Court to seek the relief of bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State, and learned counsel for original complainant. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. The present offence came to be registered on the complaint of father of deceased Kavita. Applicant no.1 and 2 are parents-in-law of deceased and applicant no.3 is the brother in law of deceased. Admittedly, marriage of deceased Kavita was solemnized on 06/05/2009. There are allegations in the complaint that after initial 4 months, dispute started between Kavita, her husband, and her in laws on the count of their illegal demand of Rs.1,00,000/- and also on the allegation that she was not able to do household work properly. When this incident of harassment was reported to the parents of Kavita, the complaint appeared to be lodged before the Women’s Redressal Forum, Parbhani. Then the meeting was arranged at the village level amongst family members of husband of Kavita and her parents at village Ghatangra, Kali Mati Tanda, where the present applicants and deceased were residing. There are allegations that due to the adamant nature of applicants, the meeting was failed. Hence the complaint was lodged with Women’s Redressal Forum, in which on 05/05/2010, settlement arises on the assurance given by the applicants that further Kavita will be treated properly, and sent back to her matrimonial home, where she committed 3 suicide on 24/05/2010, of which complaint was lodged to the police station on 25/05/2010. 4. Papers of investigation discloses that the meeting of settlement was attended by applicant no.1 and 2, but the applicant no.3 was not present in that meeting. Papers of investigation do not disclose specific allegations against applicant no.3. During the course of arguments, my attention is drawn by the learned counsel for original complainant towards the complaint filed with the D.I.G that when the applicants were produced alongwith the remand papers before Lower Court, they threatened the complainant to face the dire consequences after their release on bail. This incident is of 31/05/2010. If the applicants are so bold enough to threaten the witnesses while in the police custody, and while the investigation is in progress, it is not safe to release then on bail. Application is sans any merit, hence rejected. 5. In this application, as inspite of communication by learned APP to the concerned P.I., papers of investigation were not forwarded to the office of learned APP, and because of non co-operation on the part of Police Department, delay is caused in deciding this application, hence show cause notice was issued to the concerned I.O. and S.P. Parbhani. They have filed their affidavits in reply, in which it is mentioned that an intimation was given to one Pathan, A.P.I. attached to the Pimpaldari Police station on the earlier day to attend the office of learned APP alongwith relevant papers, but for the 4 reasons known to him, he has not left the police station, which cause inconvenience to the office of learned APP. They have tendered unconditional apology about the inconvenience caused to this Court. They have assured that in due course, requisite action will be initiated against those police officers. Considering this, apology offered by the officers is accepted. Notice is discharged. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri.appl.2623-10