1 aba789.19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.789 OF 2019
Shubhangi Dhiraj Chande and another .Vs. State of Maharashtra,through
P.S.O, P.S. Hinganghat, Dist. Wardha
__
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court’s orders of directions Court’s or Judge’s orders.
and Registrar’s Orders.
Mr. S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicants.
Mr. P.S. Tembhare, A.P.P. for non applicant- State.
Mr. Gajanan Agrawal, Advocate assisting the prosecution.
CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2019
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPP) NO. 2017 OF 2019
This is an application filed by first informant to
assist the learned Additional Public Prosecutor through his
counsel.
Application is allowed Mr.Gajanan Agrawal,
learned counsel is permitted to assist the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor.
The application is disposed of.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.789 OF 2019
Heard Mr. S.V. Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the
applicants and Mr. P.S. Tembhare, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for non applicant-State and Mr. Gajanan
Agrawal, learned counsel assisting the prosecution.
The applicants are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Crime no.707/2019 registered with Police
Station, Hinganghat District Wardha for an offence
::: Uploaded on – 20/12/2019 21/12/2019 06:03:50 :::
2 aba789.19.odt
punishable under Sections 498A, 304B, 201 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The application for pre-arrest bail is vehemently
opposed not only by Mr. Tembhare, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor but also by Mr. Agrawal learned counsel
assisting the prosecution. Mr. Agrawal, learned counsel
submits that applicant no.1 Shubhangi Chandel used to stay
in the house of deceased Pooja since she was expecting
delivery of her child. Similarly, Dhiraj who is Shubhangi’s
husband and brother of Suraj i.e. the husband of deceased
Pooja, used to visit the matrimonial house of deceased
intermittently. Therefore, according to learned counsel
assisting the prosecution, applicants are fully responsible for
untimely death of Pooja.
Deceased’s marriage was performed with Suraj
on 31.05.2017. She committed suicide on 31.02.2019 at her
matrimonial house. A report is lodged by Umakant Pal,
maternal uncle of deceased Pooja. From the first information
report, it is clear that it was the maternal uncle of deceased
who brought her since his sister, namely Kamlesh Payal
resident of Uttar Pradesh was very poor person.
Gist of the allegation made in the first
information report, which is lodged on 03.11.2019, is that at
the time of the marriage, an impression was created that
Suraj is having two four-wheeler vehicles. Very reluctantly,
the first informant agreed to give certain articles in the
marriage. According to the first information report, one
Chandrashekar Kokan whose application for pre-arrest bail
::: Uploaded on – 20/12/2019 21/12/2019 06:03:50 :::
3 aba789.19.odt
was not considered favourably by this Court was mediator
and according to the first information report ultimately it
was found that Suraj was his driver and said co-accused
Chandrashekar Kokan used to instigate Suraj for demanding
₹10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) from first informant
and his family members for purchase of one school bus. It is
also stated in the first information report that Suraj, husband
of the deceased used to beat the deceased Pooja on the
instigation of his mother. According to the first information
report allegation against present applicants are that they
used to pass certain comments against deceased Pooja.
Except this allegation, both; learned counsel assisting the
prosecution and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
opposing the application could not point out any material.
Applicant Shubhangi is a Talathi. She works at
Ramtek. Whereas her husband applicant Dhiraj as a teacher
and he discharging his duties at Samudrapur. Shubhangi
was visiting the house of Dhiraj since she was expecting her
child is not at all abnormal. Similarly, Dhiraj is visiting his
brother. The said also could not be objected, as sought to be
objected by the learned counsel for the first informant.
During their stay, they may have involved in
objectionable acts against the deceased Pooja however
prosecution case is totally silent about the same. What the
prosecution case is against these two persons is that they
used to pass certain comments. It is not the prosecution
case that either they used to demand any money from
deceased Pooja or her relatives. It is not the case of the
::: Uploaded on – 20/12/2019 21/12/2019 06:03:50 :::
4 aba789.19.odt
prosecution that because of non-fulfillment of demand of
Suraj or others, they used to maltreat the deceased.
It is reported that Shubhangi has recently gave
birth to a male child. Looking to the nature of accusation
made in the first information report and the other papers of
the investigation, in my view, custodial presence of the
applicant is not at all necessary.
Consequently, I confirm the interim order dated
22.11.2019 passed by this Court (Coram: Manish Pitale, J.)
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest in connection with Crime
no.707/2019 registered with Police Station, Hinganghat
District Wardha for an offence punishable under Sections
498A, Section304B, Section201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, applicant no.1- Shubhangi Dhiraj Chandel, applicant
no.2 – Dhiraj Umashankar Chandel be released on they
executing P.R. Bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- each with one
solvent surety each in the like amount.
(iii) Applicant no.2-Dhiraj alone is directed to attend
Police Station, Hinganghat as and when he is called by the
investigating officer. However, for that the investigating
officer shall give clear cut two days prior written
communication to the applicant no.2.
The application is disposed of.
JUDGE
srwagh
::: Uploaded on – 20/12/2019 21/12/2019 06:03:50 :::
