Partly allowed

Pavitra Subhash Mane v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Apr 2019ABA/619/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge confirmed an interim anticipatory bail order, directing the applicant to attend the Investigating Officer from 10:00 am to 1:00 pm until the filing of the charge-sheet if summoned. The court rejected the accused's involvement in abetting the victim's suicide.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail order dated 12 March 2019 confirmed. Applicant directed to attend IO between 10:00 am to 1:00 pm until charge-sheet; prohibited from tampering with witnesses.

Pavitra Subhash Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ppn 1 9.aba-619.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.619 OF 2019

¶4

Sou. Pavitra Subhash Mane .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶5

Mr.Kuldeep S. Patil I/by Mr.Prashant S. Hagare for the applicant. Mr.S.H.Yadav, APP for respondent-State. Mr.V.V. Bhapkar, Police Constable, Indapur Police Station, Pune.

¶6

CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 16^th April 2019

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned APP.

¶9

Perused case diary.

¶10

Applicant is found protected by interim order passed by this

¶11

Court dated 12^th March 2019 wherein it is noted that deceased had set herself on fire and committed suicide due to quarrel which took place on trivial issue of grazing of hens in the field of complainant and on perusal of case diary, applicant is found involved by deceased for above reason in her dying declaration recorded by police, however no involvement of applicant is found in report lodged by husband of deceased on this count.

¶12

Learned APP submitted that from the statement of

¶13

witnesses, only involvement of applicant is of using abusive language

¶14

ppn 2 9.aba-619.19.doc

¶15

against deceased and there is nothing on record which abetted commission of suicide of deceased as instigated by applicant. Admittedly, while on interim protection though applicant was directed to attend Investigating Officer from 15^th March 2019 to 19^th March 2019 between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 noon, learned APP submits that she attended Investigating Officer only on 3 days. In that view of the matter and having considering evidence as aforesaid, order dated 12^th March 2019 is liable to be confirmed as per order below:-

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(i) Order dated 12^th March 2019 stands confirmed with a direction to

¶18

applicant to attend Investigating Officer if called between 10.00 a.m. to

¶19

1.00 noon till filing of charge-sheet;

¶20

(ii) Applicant shall not tamper with witnesses or investigation.

¶21

(iii) Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶22

P.N. DESHMUKH, J.

Pavitra Subhash Mane v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pavitra Subhash Mane v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mehboob Alam Samidulla Maniyar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Bhauso Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arif Gulab Attar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogesh Pralhad Adsul Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahesh Mohan Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra