Shakuntala Ravi Kadu and Ors. vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

Shakuntala Ravi Kadu and Ors. vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

1 11-ABA 1489-24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1489 OF 2024

Shakuntala Ravi Kadu

Bhagyashree Sandeep Itadkar 3. Jyoti Haresh Tare … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

Mr. Manas N. Gawankar for the Applicant.

Ms. A. A. Deshmukh, APP for Respondent No.1-State.

Mr. Girish Palav i/by Falguni Brahmbhatt (through Legal Aid) for Respondent No.2.

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA MANOJ MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2025.12.16 15:35:28 +0530

P.C. :

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2025

1. This is an Application for anticipatory bail.

The Applicants are apprehending their arrest in Crime No.286 of 2024 registered with Vitthalwadi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304(B), 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Applicant No. 1 is the mother-in-law and Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are the sisters-in-law of the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, which took place on 26^th April 2024, the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself at her residence. It is alleged that the present Applicants and co-accused mentally and physically tortured

1 of 3

Mugdha

2 11-ABA 1489-24.doc

the deceased since her marriage in the year 2023, due to which she was compelled to commit suicide. During investigation, it was revealed that the deceased was five months pregnant at the time of the incident.

I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicants, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2-first informant.

Learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that afterthought allegations are made against the Applicants to implicate them in a false crime. It is submitted that Applicant Nos.2 and 3 never resided with the deceased at her matrimonial house and therefore the incidents alleged in the FIR are concocted. It is submitted that Applicant No.2 has a three year old son and a six month old daughter and Applicant No.3 has a three month old son. It is further submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the Applicants are ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation.

On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2-first informant submit that the Applicants are involved in a serious crime of abetment of suicide of a pregnant lady. It is submitted that on the date of incident, the deceased had sent a WhatsApp message to her mother, which shows that the deceased was fed up with the harassment of the Applicants. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the Applicants may not be released on anticipatory bail.

2 of 3

Mugdha

3 11-ABA 1489-24.doc

I have perused the papers of investigation. There are specific allegations of harassment against the present Applicants. The deceased was five months pregnant at the time of incident. The WhatsApp message sent by the deceased to her mother just prior to the incident reads thus:

ßeEeh eyk tj dk; >kyk ek÷;k thokpk eh dk; dsyk rj fuys’k vkf.k iIik lksMwu R;k fr?khauk lksMw udks R;kauh brdk lxGk d#u eh [kksVhp vkgs Bjoya vkgs ek÷;k fuys’k vkf.k iIik pkaxys vkgsr R;k nks?kkauk lksMwu ;k fr?khauk lksMw udks rw iksjh lkBh ,o<a djeh dk; dsyk rjÞ

The above message prima-facie shows that the deceased was fed up with the harassment caused by the Applicants. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the Applicants on anticipatory Bail. Hence, the Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected.

Needless to mention that observations, if any, in this order are prima-facie.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

3 of 3

Mugdha