1 3115.11 Cri.Appln. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3115 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 379 OF 2011 Govinda S/o Digamber Wagh ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Smt. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for applicant Shri N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent /State ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 23 rd September, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused application and the record. 2. The applicant / accused, convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860, has moved this application for grant of bail. 3. Shivkanta, wife of the applicant / accused, committed suicide by jumping in well along with her two sons on 02-04-2007. Investigation carried out by the Police following the complaint 2 3115.11 Cri.Appln. lodged by the father of the deceased on 03-04-2007 led to lodging of the charge-sheet for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC, 1860’), against the applicant / accused and seven other in-laws of the deceased Shivkanta. 4. The learned trial Court, upon considering the evidence of the prosecution witnesses i.e. father, maternal uncle, brother and two sisters of the deceased Shivkanta as well as other prosecution witnesses, convicted the applicant/ accused, husband of the deceased and imposed maximum sentence upon him to suffer six years R.I. along with total fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and acquitted other accused, the in-laws of the deceased, of all the offences charged against them. Learned trial Court observed that the continuous ill- treatment meted out to the deceased Shivkanta at the hands of the accused at her matrimonial home till her death amounted to a instigation to commit suicide and as a result thereof, Shivkanta had ended her life and the life of her two sons. Learned trial Court found no merit in the defence of the accused that after the marriage there was quarrel between Shivkanta and wife of Ganesh and in heat of depression thereafter Shivkanta had committed suicide. 3 3115.11 Cri.Appln. 5. The learned Advocate Smt. Jadhav for the applicant / accused submitted that the prosecution evidence was directed to prove the case of harassment of the deceased Shivkanta, at the hands of her in-laws, and in fact, it failed to prove the said fact. She further submitted that at the material time, the applicant / accused was not in company of the deceased Shivkanta, and this could be seen from the evidence of PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav, the maternal uncle of the deceased. She further submitted that the applicant / accused was on bail during trial and had not misused the liberty availed by him, as a result of bail granted to him in course of trial. She therefore, passionately urged for the grant of bail to the applicant / accused in the present application. 6. The learned APP opposes the grant of bail to the applicant/ accused. He pointed out from the evidence of PW-1- Sonaji Kakade, father of the deceased as well as other witnesses particularly PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav, as to how the deceased Shivkanta was being ill-treated by the accused including the applicant/ accused, for the purposes of extracting monetary benefits and the demand made by the accused No. 1 with PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav for an amount of Rs. 80,000/-, a day prior to the suicide committed by the deceased Shivkanta proved to be the last straw on the camel’s back. He further pointed out from the 4 3115.11 Cri.Appln. evidence of PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav that the applicant / accused No. 1 had gone to PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav and demanded an amount of Rs. 80,000/- for repaying the loan taken from his sister and Shivkanta had telephoned PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav at about 11.00 a.m. on 02-04-2007 to tell him not to give money to her husband, as giving money to her husband was not to be useful. 7. Fact of monetary demand made by the accused No. 1 and ill-treatment meted out to the deceased Shivkanta figures in the evidence of PW-1 Sonaji Kakade. Reiteration of this demand to the distaste of the victim a day prior to the commission of suicide also figures in the evidence of PW-3 Bapurao Jadhav. Prima facie these acts provide basis for the learned Trial Court’s observations regarding guilt of the accused. Suspension of sentence is, therefore, not warranted. The application is, therefore, rejected. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) SDM* September-11