Bombay High Court
Preetti Wd/O. Sanjay Bhange (In Jail) vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 16 October, 2018
Author: M.G. Giratkar
Bench: M. G. Giratkar
1 161018 ba 793.18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
Criminal Application (BA) No.793 of 2018
(Preeti Bhange V State of Maharashtra tahr PS Kharangana, District
Wardha)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judges Order.
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Shri A.M. Jaltare, Counsel for applicant.
Shri Jawade, APP for State.
Coram : M.G. Giratkar, J.
Dated : 16 October, 2018.
th
By this application, the applicant is prying for grant of bail as
per the provisions of Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is
submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant, that the applicant is
falsely involved in the crime for the offence punishable under Sections 302,
120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. There is no specific evidence
against her. The main accused in this crime is released by the Sessions
Court, Wardha, by order dated 31-05-2018. She has undergone medical
treatment and her uterus is removed. Therefore, he prayed for bail.
2. Application is strongly opposed by the learned APP.
3. Heard Shri Jaltare, learned Counsel for the applicant. He has
submitted that there is no specific evidence against the applicant in
respect of commission of crime. The case of the prosecution is based on
circumstantial evidence and the circumstances are not so strong to point
out the guilt towards the accused/applicant. Therefore, she is entitled for
bail on the ground of parity. There is no specific reasons recorded by the
::: Uploaded on - 16/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2018 02:49:08 :::
2 161018 ba 793.18.odt
Sessions Court while rejecting the bail application.
4. Heard learned APP for the State. He has strongly objected
the application. He has submitted that the applicant and accused no.1
were having illicit relations. They have hatched conspiracy and killed the
husband of applicant. Hence, the application is liable to be rejected.
5. It is the case of the prosecution, that the applicant developed
illicit relationship with accused no.1. Both have hatched conspiracy and
killed the husband of the applicant. Except the allegations about illicit
relationship between applicant and her paramour accused no.1, there is
no specific evidence against the applicant. Moreover, prime accused in
the crime i.e. accused no.1 is already released by the Sessions Court,
Wardha, on 31-05-2018. While convicting the accused circumstantial
evidence must be strong.
6. From the perusal of case diary, it appears that except the
allegation about illicit relationship between applicant and her paramour
accused no.1, there is no evidence against the applicant. On the other
hand, it appears that crime was registered against one unknown person.
The applicant being a lady, she has undergone medical treatment and her
uterus is removed in the Government hospital at Wardha. At this stage,
looking to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant,
the applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
(a) Applicant Preeti wd/o Sanjay Bhange, be released on bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- .
::: Uploaded on - 16/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2018 02:49:08 :::3 161018 ba 793.18.odt
(b) She shall not tamper the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court, Wardha, without prior permission.
(c) Bail before the Sessions Court.
JUDGE Deshmukh ::: Uploaded on - 16/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2018 02:49:08 :::