Allowed

Deepak Namdeo Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC19 Mar 2012APPLN/934/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed two criminal applications for anticipatory bail. The applicants faced charges of murder and cruelty within a family dispute where the victim drowned in a well. The Court found weak prosecution evidence and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applications allowed; applicants released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing personal bond and solvent surety of Rs. 25,000 each, with conditions to attend the Investigating Officer.

Deepak Namdeo Jadhav Vs the State of Mah — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

Cri.Appl.No.934 of 2012 and another

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.934 OF 2012

¶5

Deepak S/o.Namdeo Jadhav, Age-30 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Sonai, Ta.Newasa, Dist.Ahmednagar APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT

¶8

WITH

¶9

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1129 OF 2012

¶10

Dnyandeo Ananda Jadhav, Age-48 years, Occu-Meson Work,

¶11

Sangita Dnyandeo Jadhav, Age-45 years, Occu-Household,

¶12

Both R/o.Near Public School, Yashwantnagar, Sonai, Ta.Newasa, Dist.Ahmednagar APPLICANTS

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT

¶15

Mr.S.S.Shete, learned advocate for the applicant in Cri.Appl.No.934/2012. Mr.Joydeep Chatterji, learned advocate for the applicants in Cri.Appl.No. 1129/2012.

¶16

Mr.R.P.Phatke, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶17

Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, learned advocate for the original complainant.

¶18

(CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J.)

¶19

DATE : 19/03/2012

¶20

PER COURT :

¶21

These are applications for anticipatory bail.

¶22

¶23

Cri.Appl.No.934 of 2012 and another

¶24

Offence is registered against the applicants u/s. 498-A, 120(B), 302, 201 r/w. 34 of IPC with Pathardi Police Station.

¶25

Applicant Dipak Jadhav is accused no.4 and applicants Dnyandeo Jadhav and Sangita Jadhav are accused no.2 and 3. Accused Dnyandeo is brother of accused no.1 Ashok. Ashok is the husband of victim. Sangita is wife of accused no.2 Dnyandeo. Applicant no.4 Dipak is cousin.

¶26

Heard parties. Perused case diary.

¶27

Informant has stated in FIR that he arrived at village Kadgaon, Tal.Pathardi on receiving telephonic message from accused no.1 Ashok. After arriving, he came to know that Janabai, his niece was missing. After taking search by the informant, dead body of Janabai was found drowned into the well, which is in proximity to the property of the accused.

¶28

Dead body was recovered. Post mortem examination was conducted. Dead body was collected by informant and last rite were performed by him.

¶29

Perusal of case diary reveals that the death of victim was caused due to cardio respiratory arrest due to Asphyxia due to drowning. Post mortem examination notes do not indicate any antecedent injuries. Abdomen was found filled with water.

¶30

The informant contends that the accused persons had fled away soon informant arrived at village Kadgaon.

¶31

Prosecution has not been able to lay hands on the eye witnesses of the incident. It is the case of circumstantial evidence.

¶32

¶33

Cri.Appl.No.934 of 2012 and another

¶34

Any circumstantial evidence showing involvement of the accused in such manner that the authorship of cause of death of victim be attributed to the accused.

¶35

In relation to illtreatment, evidence is in the nature of hear-say.

¶36

On what prima facie appears, as indicated here in before, this Court arrives at the conclusion that this may be the case where the accused may not be guilty of offence, for which crime has been registered.

¶37

In the given situation, applicants are entitled for the relief sought for.

¶38

Both applications are allowed. In the event of arrest, applicants be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing the personal bond and solvent surety in a sum of Rs.25,000/- each.

¶39

Applicants shall attend the Investigating Officer for 4 days between 26/03/2012 to 29/03/2012, between 3 to 5 p.m. and thereafter as and when called.

¶40

(A.H.JOSHI, J.)

¶41

khs/MARCH 2012/934-12

Deepak Namdeo Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Namdeo Jadhav v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balaji Ram Lakamwar Vs the State of Mah

Sandeep Vyankat Munde Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Kishan Hanmantrao Kadam and Ors. Vs the State of Mah

Balasaheb Nana Torne Vs Dnyandeo Ananda Jadhav and Ors.

Milind Ramesh Yennam Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Abdul Aziz Shaikh Shamshoddin Vs the State of Mah