Bombay High Court
Vitthal S/O Sitaram Nilakhe vs The State Of Maharashtra on 27 February, 2019
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
1 BA.189-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO.189 OF 2019
Vitthal s/o Sitaram Nilakhe,
Age 39 years, Occu. Agri.,
R/o Jamkhed, Taluka Ambad,
District Jalna. ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
...
Mr. P.P.More, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A.S.Shinde, APP for Respondent-State
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 27.02.2019
PER COURT :-
The applicant is accused for allegedly abetting
suicide by his wife by subjecting her to cruelty. She
consumed poison on 21.01.2019. The FIR was lodged by
father of the deceased. The Crime No.24 of 2019 was
registered with Ambad Police Station, Jalna for the
offences punishable under Sections 306, 498-A, 323
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He is
::: Uploaded on - 28/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2019 06:24:14 :::
2 BA.189-19.odt
now seeking bail.
2. The learned advocate for the applicant submits
that the couple was married for about 10 years and had
also begotten a son. There is no apparent reason for
any discord. Merely because the deceased had
consumed poison, he is being blamed. He has been
arrested on the very next day which must have enabled
the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation.
He is ready to co-operate him even now and may be
granted bail.
3. The learned APP opposes the application on the
ground that the investigation is still incomplete. He
points out the statement of a neighbour Prayag Kailas
Pandhare to whom oral dying declaration has been
made wherein the deceased has disclosed the cause
which led her to commit suicide. In view of such direct
evidence, there is apparent involvement of the applicant
in the crime. There is every possibility of his influencing
the witnesses and may not be granted bail.
::: Uploaded on - 28/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2019 06:24:14 :::
3 BA.189-19.odt
4. I have carefully gone through the papers of the
investigation. As is pointed out by the learned APP
there is a witness by name Prayag Kailas Pandhare, who
has stated to have rushed to the spot having heard the
commotion. He has further stated about the deceased
having told him that the applicant was beating her
under influence of alcohol and was demanding money
and fed up with it she had consumed poison. This
clearly suggests that there was no other reason which
can be referred to the alleged ill-treatment.
5. Since the applicant is already in jail from
22.01.2019 and even the statement of this witness has
already been recorded, in my considered view, he
deserves to be released on bail subject to suitable
conditions which would obviate any tampering. Hence, I
pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a Personal Recognizance for an ::: Uploaded on - 28/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2019 06:24:14 ::: 4 BA.189-19.odt amount of Rs.15,000/- and furnishing a solvent surety in the like amount subject to the following conditions :
(a) He shall attend the concerned Police Station on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, till filing of the charge-
sheet and shall co-operate the Investigating Officer.
(b) He shall not tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses.
(iii) Bail before the trial court.
(iv) It is made clear that the observations made herein above are confined to the decision of this application and the learned Trial Judge shall not feel influenced by them.
(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) ...
vmk/-
::: Uploaded on - 28/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2019 06:24:14 :::