Allowed

Pallavi Arun Waghole v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Oct 2021ABA/807/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Bombay crate standard bail applications filed by Widow and her daughter and another applicant under Section 438 CrPC apprehending arrest under Sections 306, 385 and 506 IPC. Court allowed applications by finding prima facie ingredients of offences attracted.

What did the court decide?

Both anticipatory bail applications allowed and ad-interim protections confirmed and made absolute.

Pallavi Arun Waghole Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

4-ABA-807WITH 707-2021.DOC

¶2

Digitally signed by TRUPTI TRUPTI SADANAND SADANAND BAMNE BAMNE Date: 2021.10.13 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 20:32:07 +0530 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 807 OF 2021

¶4

Pallavi Arun Waghole...Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶7

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 707 OF 2020

¶8

Salman Mehraj Khan...Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶11

……
Mr. Nitesh J. Mohite for the Applicant in both the Anticipatory Bail
Applications.

¶12

Mr.S.R.Agarkar, APP for the Respondent -State.

¶13

CORAM:V.G.BISHT, J.
DATE:13th OCTOBER, 2021

¶14

PC:-

¶15

1. The present Applications have been moved by the Applicants

¶16

under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
apprehending arrest under Sections 306, 385, 506 read with 34 of
the Indian Penal Code (the IPC) registered vide Crime No. 85 of
2020 with Sangli City Police Station, Sangli.

¶17

Trupti

¶18

1/4

¶19

4-ABA-807WITH 707-2021.DOC

¶20

2.It is the case of the prosecution that the Applicant Pallavi
Arun Waghole happens to be the widow of Arun Waghole, who
committed suicide on 1st March, 2020 by consuming poison.
According to prosecution, the present Applicant Pallavi Waghole
and her daughter were having illicit relations with co-accused
Salman Mehraj Khan i.e. the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail
Application No. 707 of 2020 and on account of their ill-treatment,
the deceased Arun Waghole committed suicide.

¶21

3. Mr. Mohite, learned Counsel for the Applicants, submits that having regard to the contents of FIR, prima facie ingredients of Sections levied against the Applicants are not attracted. Even otherwise, the present case does not require custodial interrogation and therefore, both the Applications deserve to be allowed.

¶22

4. Per contra, Mr.Agarkar, learned APP, opposes the submission

¶23

by contending that the investigation is in progress and having
regard to the nature of accusation, the Applicants should not be
given benefit of the pre-arrest bail.

¶24

Trupti

¶25

2/4

¶26

4-ABA-807WITH 707-2021.DOC

¶27

5.I have carefully gone through the contents of the FIR. It
appears from the FIR that the daughter of deceased and his wife
were having illicit relations with Ritesh Patil, Salman Khan and
Pramod Kudale and in connivance with them had threatened the
deceased to defame him.

¶28

6.It is further alleged that the deceased was blackmailed by
the Applicant Salman Khan and he also extracted monies from
deceased. Thus, feeling embarrassed and harassed, the deceased
committed suicide.

¶29

7.Having regard to the contents of FIR, in my considered
opinion, prima facie the present case does not attract the
ingredients of offence under Sections 306 of the IPC. It is nowhere
alleged that the deceased was subjected to such an extreme
position by Applicants that he had no other alternative but to
commit suicide. The amount of abetment required as per mandate
of Section 306 is prima facie missing.

¶30

Trupti

¶31

3/4

¶32

4-ABA-807WITH 707-2021.DOC

¶33

8. In such circumstances, in my considered opinion, the

¶34

Applicants have made out a case for consideration. Hence, the
following order :

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i) Both the Applications are allowed ;

¶37

ii)The ad-interim protection granted by this Court on 2nd
December, 2020 in Anticipatory Bail Application No.
807 of 2021 is confirmed and made absolute;

¶38

iii) The ad-interim protection granted by this Court on 15^th May, 2020 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 707 of 2020 is confirmed and made absolute;

¶39

iii)The Applications stand disposed of accordingly.

¶40

 (V.G.BISHT, J. )

¶41

Trupti

¶42

4/4

Pallavi Arun Waghole v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pallavi Arun Waghole 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

Shankar Shivaji Dhale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankar Shivaji Dhale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nilesh Ramesh Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Salman Mehraj Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prashant Bhagwan Shiral Vs the State of Maharashtra

Darshan Uttam Donde Vs the State of Maharashtra