High Court granted bail to the appellant in a murder and dowry harassment case. The court noted the investigation is complete, the dying declaration did not implicate him, and continued custody serves no purpose.
Directed the applicant to be released on bail by furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
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.
14-ba-431-20.odt
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 431 OF 2020
Nitin Waman Kamble .... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
Mr. Amol B. Jagtap for Applicant. Smt. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 28th JUNE, 2021 (Through Video Conferencing)
P.C. :
1 of 6
Gokhale
: 2 : 14-ba-431-20.odt
lodged by one Meera Asware who was mother of the deceased Vijaya. She has stated that, Vijaya had got married with the present applicant on 09/12/2000. They had a son from their marriage. There are allegations in the F.I.R. that the applicant was not treating her well. He was abusing her and even used to give cigarette burns. The applicant had illicit affairs and used to harass her physically. The deceased wanted divorce from him. In 2002 the applicant had allegedly beaten her and had demanded money from her parental house. According to the first informant, at that time he was paid Rs.1 lakh. The deceased had filed a petition in the family court in the year 2002, but the applicant had convinced her to withdraw it. They were residing together. The F.I.R. mentions that, son of the deceased had also fallen for vices and was addicted to liquor. It is alleged that the applicant had forced the deceased to drink poisonous substance about six months prior to F.I.R. It is mentioned that, in the previous month of the incident he had beaten the deceased. On 20/10/2019 the deceased consumed poison used for killing rats and had succumbed to the effect of that poison. On this basis the F.I.R. is lodged.
2 of 6
: 3 : 14-ba-431-20.odt
couple had got married in the year 2000 and after about 19 years the deceased had consumed poison. Therefore, there could not be any allegation of constant harassment at the hands of present applicant. He submitted that, no particular overt act is attributed against the applicant. He submitted that the F.I.R. is lodged on the basis of suspicion. The informant’s relatives and some of the neighbours are also making false allegations based on suspicion and anger. He submitted that the applicant is already in custody for over a long period and, therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. He submitted that, there is dying declaration recorded by the police and the deceased had not blamed the applicant in that dying declaration.
3 of 6
: 4 : 14-ba-431-20.odt
assistance of both learned counsel I have perused entire chargesheet. The important circumstance in this case is dying declaration recorded by police constable attached to Bharti Vidyapeeth police station. The dying declaration given by the deceased mentions that, on 19/10/2019 she was under mental tension because of domestic reason and she consumed the powder use for killing rats. She was taken to Health Care Hospital near her house and thereafter her husband had taken her to Vighnaharta hospital on 20/10/2019 at about 2:00a.m. and that she had no complaint against anybody. This dying declaration describes two things; first of all that she had consumed poison because of domestic tension. She has not squarely and specifically attributed any role to the present applicant. Secondly, this dying declaration shows that the applicant herself had taken her to Vighnaharta hospital. This indicates that the applicants had made some efforts to save her. 7. The F.I.R. itself mentions that the son of the deceased had fallen for vices which also was a possible factor for her disturbed mental state. The statement of the applicant’s son Vinit is recorded. He has stated that on 18/10/2019, there was quarrel
4 of 6
: 5 : 14-ba-431-20.odt
between the applicant and the deceased. The quarrel had started becasuse Vineet had returned home late. Thus, this quarrel had nothing to do with the problems inter-se between the couple, but it was because of their son’s behaviour.
5 of 6
: 6 : 14-ba-431-20.odt
about the reason for consuming this poison. Thus, as discussed, there are allegations against the present applicant. At the same time, there are certain factors in his favour. However, applicant’s guilt or innocence can be decided only at the conclusion of the trial. The trial is likely to take a long time, even to commence. The applicant is in custody since 21/10/2019. The investigation is already over and his further custody will not serve any purpose. The applicant does not have criminal antecedents. In this view of the matter, the applicant can be granted bail.
ORDER
(i) In connection with C.R.No. 659 of 2019 registered at Bharti Vidyapeeth police station, Pune, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
6 of 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in a case involving alleged culpable homicide not amounting to murder and offence under section 498A IPC.
Whether the execution of the Charge Sheet and the absence of prior criminal antecedents warrant release on bail despite pending trial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nitin Waman Kamble
The State of Maharashtra
SARANG V. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
