1 sns IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.743 OF 2011 Mr. Suresh Baburao Gaikwad ...Applicant. v/s State ...Respondent. Mr.A.P.Mundargi i/by Prakash Naik ,advs. For the Applicant. Ms P.P.Shinde, APP For the Respondent/State. Mr. P.R.Arjunwadkar, adv. For the Org. Complainant/Intervener. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA,J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 5,2011. P.C. 1 Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in crime no.148 of 2011 registered at Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar under section 306,354,506,509 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.C. on the report lodged by one Lahane in respect of suicide committed by his son Prashant. 2 Sangita, who is sister of the deceased Prashant and daughter of the complainant was in service of the Education Board of Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation as coordinator on temporary basis since the year 2004. It is alleged that the present applicant , who was administrative officer in the education board of the Municipal Corporation 2 Ulhasnagar had demanded an amount of Rs.1 lac for submitting proposal for her confirmation in service. When she refused, he used to harass her sexually but she did not respond and in fact, resisted to his advances, therefore, she was made to go to different places with intention to harass her. On 22nd June, 2011, the applicant allegedly managed to get the resolution passed against her by the Education Board to remove her from service and to lodge F.I.R. against her. She and her brother Prashant tried to save her job and she had threatened to commit suicide on 25.7.2011 unless injustice was not undone. However, she dropped her intention to commit suicide in view of the assurance given by senior officers of the Municipal Corporation. Finally, on 2.8.2011 Prashant immolated himself in front of office of the Municipal Corporation and died. Report of the incident was lodged by his father on the same day. 3 The applicant claims to be innocent and according to him, all the allegations were made against him and others only after the Education 3 Board had passed certain resolutions for taking action against her for misbehaviour and also that she was in habit of making false allegations against the different persons. 4 To make out the case that the applicant and the others had abetted the deceased Prashant to commit suicide, prosecution relies on the statement of Sangita that the applicant and others had provoked him to commit suicide by saying that his sister had cancelled the idea of committing suicide and if he was so respectable, he could commit suicide himself and because of this, he immolated himself. It appears from the record that during the investigation, initially Sangita did not appear to make oral statement before the police. She submitted typewritten statement, wherein she had alleged that S.B.Gaikwad and Shubhangi Salunkhe, who is the wife of head-master Salunkhe, Dhananjay Bodare, Chandrakant Bodare and Ganesh Shimpi had seen Sangita and her brother making attempts to save the job and then these persons laughed at them and told her Whether your sister has cancelled idea of “ 4 committing suicide ? If you are so respectable now you commit suicide and it will not make difference to us and nobody can cause any harm to us . It ” appears that investigation has been entrusted to the CID and CID officers also recorded the similar statement of Sangita on 20.8.2011. That statement indicates that such comment was made between 25.7.2011 to 2.8.2011. The Investigating Officer did not make any attempt to find out from Sangita as to on what date , time and place such comment was made and who had made such comment. This is a general statement attributed to five persons allegedly made during the period from 25.7.2011 to 2.8.2011. It shows that no serious attempt was made by the Investigating Officer to find out the truth. Though the investigation is with CID since 12.8.2011, no attempt has been made to record statement of any other person in support this contention. There is sufficient documentary evidence to show that on and before 22nd June, 2011, there was resolution passed by a large number of staff members of Education Board against Sangita. They 5 had made representation to Education Board and Education Board had decided to take action against her and to lodge F.I.R. Prosecution could not point out any documentary evidence to show that prior to 22nd June, 2011, said Sangita had made any written complaint against the present applicant before any authority or board. To corroborate the statement of Sangita in respect of the alleged instigation to her brother , there is no material as of today. 5 Mr. Arjunwadkar, the learned counsel for the complainant tried to contend that Sangita comes from the lower strata of the society as she belongs to the scheduled caste and because of that she and her family are harassed. However, the learned senior counsel for the applicant pointed out that the applicant is also a member of scheduled caste and both belong to the same caste and community. Therefore, contention of the learned counsel that Sangita and her brother were being harassed by the present applicant on the ground of her caste can not be accepted. 6 Taking into consideration, the facts and 6 circumstances noted above and the requirements of abetment as defined under Section 107 of the I.P.C. in my opinion, it is fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 7 In the event of arrest in crime no.148 of 2011 registered at Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar under section 306 , 354, 506, 509 r/w section 34 of the I.P.C., the applicant be released on his executing PR of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with condition that he shall make himself available to the police as and when required for the purpose of interrogation/investigation. He shall fully co- operate with the police and shall not misuse the bail. 8 Application stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)