SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Anita W/O. Shivaji Kad And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 25 February, 2020

16 aba 181 20.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 181 OF 2020

1) Anita w/o Shivaji Kad,
Age 26 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. At post Naygaon Siddheshwar,
Tq. Purandhar, District Pune.

2) Sangita w/o Datta Pawar,
Age 31 years, Occ. Housewife,
R/o. At post Korangali, Tq. Ausa,
District Latur. … Applicants.

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Inspector,
Police Station, M.I.D.C. Waluj,
Aurangabad. … Respondent.

Advocate for the Applicants : Ms. Tanvi V. Jadhav.
A.P.P. for the Respondent/State : Mr. V.S. Badakh.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 25/02/2020
PER COURT :

The applicants are the married sisters-in-law of the deceased
seeking bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.
200/2019, registered with Bembli police Station, District Osmanabad,
for the offences punishableu nder Section 498A, 306, 323, 504 read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. In sum and substance the allegations are to the effect that the
deceased was married in the year 2011. She was maintained properly
for first four-five years. Since thereafter she was subjected to cruelty
on account of the demand by the husband and the in laws and even

1/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/02/2020 28/02/2020 02:54:50 :::
16 aba 181 20.odt
the present applicants for money. She was physically and mentally
tortured and was left with no other alternative but to end her life by
jumping into a well. Thus all the accused are alleged to have abetted
her suicide.

3. The learned advocate for the applicants submits that the
applicants are the married sisters in law. It is unlikely that when the
husband and the parents were around they could have indulged in the
alleged act. The allegations in the F.I.R. as against the applicants are
omnibus. No specific overt act is attributed to either of them. Since
they are married they have been residing far away from the residence
of the deceased. Already the husband and their parents have been
granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Custodial interrogation of
these applicants is not necessary. Both the applicants are carrying
pregnancy. They are ready to cooperate the investigating officer and
ad-interim anticipatory bail may be confirmed.

4. The learned A.P.P. opposes the application. He submits that
the investigation is still to be completed. Custodial interrogation of the
applicants is necessary to ascertain as to in what form they were
involved. Prima-facie there are allegations about even the applicants
having taken part in subjecting the deceased to cruelty. The
application may be rejected.

5. Bare perusal of the F.I.R. and papers of the investigation
reveal that though the applicants who are the married sisters in law
have been named in the F.I.R. and allegations are also attributed to
them by the informant and the relatives of the deceased, no specific
overt act is attributed to them. Along with the husband and parents in
law, a vague reference is made to the applicants about even they
having subjected the deceased to cruelty.

2/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/02/2020 28/02/2020 02:54:50 :::

16 aba 181 20.odt

6. As far as the period immediately prior to the suicide, even
according to the F.I.R. and the witnesses, the deceased had made a
phone call but had only attributed the illtreatment to the husband and
parents in laws and not to the applicants. It is under these
circumstances when the prime accused who were arrested and have
been released on regular bail, custodial interrogation of the applicants
does not seem to be imperative. Nothing is to be recovered from them.
They are married sisters in law and therefore the ad-interim relief
deserves to be confirmed.

7. The application is allowed. The ad-interim anticipatory bail
granted to the applicants by the order dated 31.01.2020 stands
confirmed with the same terms and conditions.

( MANGESH S. PATIL, J. )
mkd

3/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/02/2020 28/02/2020 02:54:50 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation