Allowed

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Feb 2021ABA/65/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant facing charges under sections 498A, 306, 504, and 506 IPC linked to the suicide of his wife. The court noted the delay in FIR lodging, the deceased's history of schizophrenia, and lack of specific irrefutable evidence against the applicant, releasing him on bond with directions to cooperate with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with PR bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties; directed to attend police station and co-operate with investigation.

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

31-ABA-65-2021.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 65 OF 2021

¶4

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone .... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent

¶5

Mr. Satish K. Kumbhar, for the applicant. Smt. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶6

CORAM:SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :5^th FEBRUARY 2021

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R. No. 254 of 2020 registered at Pandharpur Rural Police Station on 26/09/2020, under Sections 498A, 306, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

The FIR is lodged by brother of the deceased.

¶10

The deceased had got married with the applicant on 22/5/2011. They have a son aged 7 years and daughter aged 3 years. It is his contention in the FIR that after her

y.s.patil

1 of 5

31-ABA-65-2021.odt

marriage, the deceased was treated properly for one year. Thereafter the applicant started harassing her after consuming liquor. It is alleged that applicant’s character was not good. He was having illicit relations. It is alleged that he used to demand money for diferent purposes. The FIR mentiones that the informant’s family had paid about Rs. 2 lakhs to him. In 2017, the applicant’s parents sent the deceased to her maternal house and asked for money to install solar panels. In 2018, the informant again paid around Rs. 1 lakh after the demand. There are allegations that in December 2019, the applicant told the deceased that he was more interested in her sister as she was better looking and that he would send messages to her. The deceased was not happy and ultimately on 22/05/2020, she committed suicide.

¶15

3. Heard Mr. Satish Kumbhar, learned Counsel for

¶16

the applicant and Smt. A.A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State.

y.s.patil

2 of 5

31-ABA-65-2021.odt

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the incident was dated 22/5/2020 and the FIR is lodged on 26/09/2020. There was a delay of about four months in lodging of the FIR which shows that the FIR is lodged as an after thought to implicate the applicant. He submitted that the deceased was sufering from schizophrenia. That was an old ailment which she was sufering from the year 2007. She had stopped taking medication for the same and therefore that was the most probable reason for committing suicide on 22/05/2020.

¶21

The learned APP relied on the papers of investigation. The investigation papers contain statement of family of the deceased. Those statements are identical and the allegations made in the FIR are reproduced in those statements. Important statement is that of Deepali, the sister of the deceased. In her statement also no specific allegations of his advances towards her are made against the applicant. The investigation papers also y.s.patil 3 of 5

¶22

3 of 5

¶23

31-ABA-65-2021.odt

¶24

contain extract of chats between the the applicant and same Deepali. In those chats there are indications that applicant was trying to develop closer relations with Deepali. However, Deepali’s own statement, does not explain it further.

¶25

The learned APP fairly pointed out that there was an opinion of the medical ofcer issued on 27/1/2021. This medical Ofcer was treating the deceased for psychiatric disorder. She had approached this doctor in the year 2013. She was under his medication till 2018 and thereafter she did not come back to continue her medication. The papers also contain a certificate showing that she was sufering from such disorder since the year 2007. Thus, it was a chronic condition and there is a possibility that it could have led her to commit suicide as submitted by the learned Counsel for then applicant.

¶26

There are other general allegations of demand

¶27

of money etc. However, they are general in nature. They

y.s.patil

4 of 5

31-ABA-65-2021.odt

are not specifically directed against the applicant alone. Therefore, at this stage his custodial interrogation is not really required. He can be directed to attend the concerned Police Station and can be directed to cooperate with the investigation.

¶32

8. Hence the following order.

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R. No. 254 of 2020 registered with Pandharpur Rural Police Station, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶35

(ii) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called and shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶36

(iii) The Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶37

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶38

y.s.patil

¶39

5 of 5

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Shivaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sujata Manik Salunkhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dattatray @ Datta Balu Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kuchya @ Vishal Anantya @ Popat Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra