Application for bail rejected in C.R. No. 98/2009 for offences u/s 302, 498A IPC read with s. 34. Court held death by poisoning in house of applicant with no explanation from him not fit for bail.
Bail application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.487 OF 2010
Gajanan Sahebrao Patil...Applicant.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra...Respondent.
Mr. U.R.Mankapure for the Applicant.
Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP. for the State.
CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J.
DATE : 26th March, 2010
PC :
1This is an application for grant of bail.
The applicant is shown as an accused in C.R.No.
98/2009 registered by Patan Police Station for
alleged offences under Sections-302, 498A read with
34 of the I.P.C. Deceased Manjushree is his wife.
She married with the applicant on 19.2.2006 and
died on 29.8.2009. The post morotem report with
C.A. Report indicates that she died due to
poisoning and she had consumed or had been given
roger. F.I.R. has been lodged by her mother and the
2
same also indicates that immediately before the
death of deceased the present applicant and his
mother made a demand of sewing machine and the same
was provided. But this was immediately followed by
demand of Rs.2.00 lacs for digging a well. This
demand could not be fulfilled by the deceased. The
complaint indicates that her daughter had informed
her that she was being ill-treated and threatened
to bring home the demanded amount.
2.Post morotem notes indicates an abrasion
on the right elbow on the posterior lateral aspect
of size 2-cm x 1-cm. Similarly there is minor
abrasion on dorsal part size 1-cm. x ½ cm. Both
these injuries are antimortem injuries.
3It is contended that there was no material
which could be obtained by the police to indicate
the commission of the offence under Section 302 of
the I.P.C. Without going into this aspect of the
matter I find that this is a case where deceased
3
met with an unnatural end due to poisoning in the
house of the applicant. There is no explanation
whatsoever coming forward from the husband as to
how his wife expired. Even assuming that the
deceased committed suicide, prima facie, offence
may fall under Section 306 and 304B of the I.P.C.
In cases of these nature even lack of plausible
explanation has been held by the Apex Court to be a
circumstance against accused. In the circumstances,
not a fit case for grant of bail and hence, the
application is rejected.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this is a fit case for grant of bail in death by poisoning under Section 302 IPC where the accused gave no explanation for the death.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Gajanan Sahebrao Patil
The State of Maharashtra
R.S. MOHITE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court