Sachin Digitally signed
by Sachin R. Patil
R. Patil Date: 2019.11.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2019
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1319 OF 2019
1. Prashant Trambak Pawar.
2. Sachin Trambak Pawar.
3. Vimbalbai Trambak Pawar. ..Applicants.
State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent.
Mr. Rameshwar N. Gite for the Applicants.
Mr. S. S. Hulke, APP for the Respondent-State.
Coram : RANJIT MORE
M. S. KARNIK, JJ.
Date : November 26, 2019.
P. C. :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicants and
learned APP for the Respondent-State. The Applicants were
prosecuted for the offence punishable under sections 302, 201
and 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Upon
trial, they were convicted for the offence punishable under
sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of IPC. They were sentenced
to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life under section 302 and
rigorous imprisonment for 3 years under section 201 of IPC. So
far as the charge under section 498A of IPC is concerned, they
have been acquitted.
patilsr 1/ 4
2. Deceased Sarita was the wife of Applicant No.1.
Applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the brother-in-law and mother-in-law of
deceased Sarita. The case of the prosecution is that the
Applicants were suspecting the chastity of Sarita and on that
count they used to abuse and beat her. On 16 th March 2013 at
about 5.57 p.m., brother of Sarita while working in the field
received a call on his mobile phone from Bhausaheb Pawar – the
cousin of Applicant No.1, intimating that Sarita had fell into well
in the afternoon and she was injured and the Applicants had
shifted her to Vaidya Hospital, Malegaon. Thereafter, complainant
immediately intimated about the said message to his parents and
relatives. Complainant along with his mother went to Vaidya
Hospital. On query, the Applicants told complainant that Sarita
slipped and fell into the well and she died of drowning.
3. There is no direct evidence in the form of eye-
witnesses and the prosecution has relied upon the circumstantial
evidence. The circumstances relied upon by the prosecution are
that there was motive of accused to kill Sarita, and secondly, the
injuries on the dead body of deceased Sarita.
patilsr 2/ 4
. So far as the motive is concerned, PW-4, PW-5 and
PW-6 have stated that accused were suspecting the chastity of
Sarita and demanding dowry from her parents. On perusal, it
appears that allegation about the chastity by these witnesses are
improvements. The Applicants have already been acquitted of
the charge under section 498A of IPC.
. The prosecution heavily relied upon the medical
evidence which shows that there was incised wound on scaral
area 2cm X 1cm X 0.5cm oblique left lateral area, bruise over
both back of thigh upto knee and abrasion below chin. However,
PW-8 Dr. Mahendra Patil in his cross examination has admitted
that if a woman falls from height in shallow water, then injuries
mentioned in column no. 17 are possible.
4. In above facts and circumstances, coupled with the
fact that the Applicants were on bail during trial and appeal is not
likely to come up for final hearing in near future, we are inclined
to release the Applicants on bail. We accordingly allow this
application. Substantive sentences awarded to the Applicants
shall remain suspended till the final disposal of appeal. The
Applicants be released on bail on executing PR bond in the sum
patilsr 3/ 4
of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties of like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court. The Applicants shall remain
present in the Court at the time of final hearing of appeal.
5. This application stands disposed of.
[M. S. KARNIK, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
patilsr 4/ 4