Single judge allowed application for pre-arrest bail. Court held allegations were vague and primarily against the deceased's husband. Ad interim protection order from 21.09.2017 was confirmed. Case disposed allowing bail.
Application allowed and ad interim protection order dated 21.09.2017 confirmed.
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.
aba657.17.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.657/2017
Shri Madhav s/o Vithoba Mhaiskar and ors. ..vs.. State of Maharashtra through PSO P.S. Bhivapur.
_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.
Mr. P. D. Randive, Advocate for applicants. Mr. J. Y. Ghurde, A.P.P. for non applicant-State.
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 28, 2017
Heard Mr. P.D.Randive, Advocate for applicants and Mr. J.Y. Ghurde, A.P.P. for non applicantState.
I have perused the investigation papers and the reply filed on behalf of the non applicant-State. The present applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail since the applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.232/2017, registered with Police Station, Bhivapur for an offence punishable under Section 306, 304-B, 498-A, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The present applicants are father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased Nirasha. Her marriage took place with Sanjay on 13.05.2015. According to the prosecution, she committed suicide by jumping into the well on
2
aba657.17.odt
30.08.2017 due to the ill treatment at the hands of the present applicants. The FIR is lodged on the next day by Dipraj, father of the deceased.
It is reported that the husband Sanjay is already arrested by the investigating officer. With the assistance of the learned A.P.P., I have gone through the FIR so also the other statements recorded during the course of investigation. The FIR and statements of the witnesses clearly show that the entire allegations are against the husband Sanjay. They in chorus state in their police statements that the husband of the deceased was habituated to drinks and under the influence of liquor he used to beat the deceased. Further, they claim that Sanjay was having illicit relations with one Purnima and this was the cause of ill-treatment to the deceased. In the FIR, the allegations against the present applicants are not only most general but also are vague in nature.
Since all the allegations are against the husband of the deceased and there are no specific accusations against any of the present applicants, in my view, the applicants have made out a prima facie case in their favour. Further, this Court had on 21.09.2017 granted ad interim protection in favour of the present applicants with a direction that they shall attend the investigating officer on 23.09.2017, 24.09.2017 and 25.09.2017. They were directed to remain present with the investigating officer from 02.00 p.m. to 05.00 p.m. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the
3 aba657.17.odt
applicants have followed the said direction. Even the said statement is not controverted by the learned A.P.P. In that view of the matter, the present application is allowed. Ad interim order dated 21.09.2017 stands confirmed.
The application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
kahale
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants, who were apprehending arrest in connection with offences under Sections 306, 304-B, 498-A, and 506 IPC, were entitled to pre-arrest bail.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Madhav s/o Vithoba Mhaiskar and ors.
State of Maharashtra through PSO P.S. Bhivapur
V.M. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
