Bombay High Court
Devram Tukaram Kasab vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 December, 2018
Author: P.R. Bora
Bench: P.R. Bora
1 BA 1418/18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1418 OF 2018
1 Devram Tukaram Kasab, Age 34 Yrs, Applicants
Occ. Business
2 Datta Tukaram Kasab, Age 30 Yrs,
Occ. Labour
Both R/o Kok, Tq. Jintur, Dist.
Parbhani
V E R S U S
The State of Maharashtra, Through Respondent
Bori Police Station, Taluka and
District Parbhani
Mr. M.K. Bhosle, Advocate for the Applicants
Mr. S.P. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State
...
CORAM : P.R. BORA, J.
DATE : 5th December, 2018
PER COURT :
Heard Shri Bhosle, learned Advocate appearing
for the applicants and Shri Deshmukh, learned A.P.P.
appearing for the respondent-State.
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:43:50 :::
2 BA 1418/18
2. The applicants are being prosecuted for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 read
with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code in Crime No.
121/2018, registered at Bori Police Station, Taluka
and District Parbhani.
3. The alleged incident is stated to have
happened on 03.10.2018. Applicant No.1 Devram is
husband of decesed Rajamati, whereas applicant No.2-
Datta is the brother-in-law of decesed Rajamati. The
marriage of Rajamati and Devram had taken place prior
to about twelve years. It is the case of the
prosecution that deceased Rajamati ended her life by
hanging herself in her own house. It is the further
case of the prosecution that the husband of Rajamati
i.e. applicant No.1-Devram used to pay money received
from his Ration-shop to his brother Datta and wife of
his brother. As deceased Rajamati was opposing for
doing so, she was harassed by applicant No.1, and
ultimately she was compelled to end her life by
hanging herself.
4. Shri Bhosale, learned counsel for the
applicants submitted that the cruelty on the part of
the applicants as has been referred in the F.I.R. does
not fall within the definition of 'cruelty'. Learned
counsel submitted that there was no harassment to
deceased Rajamati. The learned counsel submitted that
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:43:50 :::
3 BA 1418/18
under some misconception that the applicant No.1 is
paying the amount to applicant No.2 and his wife,
deceased Rajamati took the ultimate step of committing
suicide. Learned counsel submitted that even if the
case of the prosecution is accepted as it is, even
then in view of the fact that as the entire
investigation is now completed, there is no reason for
keeping the present applicants behind bars. The
learned counsel for the applicants informed that the
third accused i.e. wife of applicant No.2 has secured
anticipatory bail from the High Court.
5. The learned A.P.P. has opposed to grant bail.
Learned A.P.P. invited my attention to the statements
of parents of deceased Rajamati recorded under Section
164 of Cr.P.C. On perusal of the statements of both
these witnesses, it is difficult to come to the
conclusion that the allegations made against the
present applicants would amount to cruelty so as to
drive deceased Rajamati to commit suicide. From the
material which has on record, it appears that out of
some misunderstanding, deceased Rajamati seems to have
taken wrong decision of ending her life. However,
that can be considered and that would be the part of
appreciation of evidence which may be adduced in the
said matter. However, on the present material on
record, I see no reason for keeping the applicants
behind the bars. Hence, the following order :-
::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:43:50 :::
4 BA 1418/18
O R D E R
i] Application is allowed.
ii] Applicants be released on bail on each of them furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.30,000/- [Rupees Thirty Thousand] with one or more sureties in the like amount.
iii] The applicants shall not tamper the prosecution evidence.
iv] Bail before the trial Court.
( P.R. BORA, J. ) SRM/5/12/18 ::: Uploaded on - 06/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:43:50 :::