Allowed

Santosh Bhagwan Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Oct 2024BA/3590/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by a husband accused under Sections 306, 323, 498A, 504 r/w 34 IPC after his wife's suicide. The court found nothing to show Section 306 was prima facie attracted since the deceased had left him two months before her death, and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in Crime No. 415 of 2024 on P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000 with one solvent surety in like amount, subject to conditions.

Santosh Bhagwan Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

19-ba-3590-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3590 OF 2024

¶5

Santosh Bhagwan Jadhav ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶6

Mr. Ranjeet Pawar, for the applicant.

¶7

Mr. S.S. Ghag, APP, for the Respondent / State.

¶8

VARSHA DEEPAK GAIKWAD

¶9

Digitally signed by VARSHA DEEPAK GAIKWAD Date: 2024.11.11 18:53:05 +0530

¶10

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.

¶11

DATE : 11TH NOVEMBER, 2024.

¶12

PC:

¶13

Heard.

¶14

By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 415 of 2024, registered with Daund Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 498A, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

Having gone through the charge-sheet and the relevant material collected by the IO during the investigation, it is evident that there are allegations of ill-treatment by the applicant, who is the husband of the deceased. It is further stated in the FIR that due to such ill-treatment, the deceased committed suicide. However, it is further evident that the deceased left the company of the applicant on

1 of 3

varsha

19-ba-3590-2024.doc

12.04.2024 and her body was found on 2.06.2024 i.e. after about two months. There is nothing to show that the offence under Section 306 of the IPC would prima facie attract in the present matter.

¶20

In that view of the matter, though the learned APP strongly opposed the application, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for grant of bail.

¶21

In the circumstance, I pass the following order:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

i) Criminal application is allowed;

¶24

ii) It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 415 of 2024, registered with Daund Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 498A, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, on furnishing P.R.Bond of Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand with one solvent surety in the like amount;

¶25

iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also not tamper with the evidence;

¶26

iv) Liberty is granted to the State to apply for cancellation of bail in case of any breach of condition or misuse of liberty by the applicant.

2 of 3

varsha

19-ba-3590-2024.doc

v) The applicant shall attend the trial before the trial Court regularly on every date unless exemption is granted by the trial Court.

¶31

The application is disposed of .

¶32

(ANIL S. KILOR, J)

¶33

3 of 3

¶34

varsha

Santosh Bhagwan Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Bhagwan Jadhav 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sunil Vasant Chougule Vs State of Maharashtra

Bira Balu Kolekar vs State of Maharashtra Anr. Anr.

Firoz @ Sameer Kacharu Sayyad vs the State of Maharashtra

Raju Anna Chaughule vs State of Maharashtra

Niyamatullah Ahemadullah Ahemadi vs State of Maharashtra

Swapnil Bharat Dhamale vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.