Bombay High Court
Sanjay Pandurang Pawar And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 July, 2019
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
1/5 22-ABA-1345-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1345 OF 2019
Sanjay Pandurang Pawar & Anr. .... Applicants
versus
The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
.......
• Mr.Nitin B. Patil, Advocate for Applicant.
• Mr.S.S. Pednekar, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 09th JULY, 2019
P.C. :
1. The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with C.R.No.153/19 registered with Sangola Police
Station, Solapur, under sections 307, 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w
34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Applicant No.1 is the husband
and Applicant No.2 is the mother-in-law of the first informant.
2. The FIR is lodged by informant on 13/02/2019. She
had mentioned in her FIR that she got married with Applicant
No.1 on 23/11/2017. After her marriage, the family members of
Nesarikar
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 11/07/2019 22:42:04 :::
2/5 22-ABA-1345-19.odt
the Applicant started ill-treating her and started demanding
money. The Applicant No.1 was ill-treating her and sometimes
assaulting her. For a few days the couple resided at Pune. The
first informant got pregnant. Then she was left at her parental
house. She delivered a baby boy on 25/11/2018. It is her case
that nobody from the Applicant No.1's family came to see her or
her new born son. Thereafter on 29/01/2019 the informant was
left at the house of Applicant No.1's father at Vatambare. Even
thereafter she was being ill-treated. The Applicant No.2 used to
give her stale food. On 11/02/2019, the Applicant No.1 had
gone to Pune. On the next day between 12.00 p.m. to 01.00
p.m. the informant's mother, who had visited her had gone to
attend nature's call, at that time allegedly victim's father-in-law
poured poison forcefully in her mouth and the Applicant No.2
assisted him by pressing her nose. After that both of them kept
her outside the house and started shouting that the informant
herself had consumed poison. Thereafter she was removed to
hospital and was treated there. On these allegations she lodged
her FIR.
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 11/07/2019 22:42:04 :::
3/5 22-ABA-1345-19.odt
3. Heard learned Counsel Mr.Nitin B. Patil for the
Applicant and learned APP Mr.S.S. Pednekar for the State.
4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Applicant No.1 was not in the village when the incident took
place. Even otherwise, the incident was quite unbelievable
because the informant's mother was very much present in the
vicinity. In her presence the Applicants could not have
committed that offence.
5. As against this, Mr.S.S. Pednekar, learned APP
submitted that the offence is serious and the investigation
papers show that the informant was treated in the hospital.
6. Considering the submissions advanced, as far as the
allegations of commission of offence u/s 498-A of IPC are
concerned, these allegations are general in nature and therefore
custodial interrogation of the Applicants for that purpose is not
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 11/07/2019 22:42:04 :::
4/5 22-ABA-1345-19.odt
necessary. The important section in this case is section 307 of
the Indian Penal Code, which is not attributed against the
present Applicant No.1 because he was not in the village when
the incident had taken place. Therefore, in any case, his
custodial interrogation for investigation into the offence u/s 307
of IPC is not necessary. Insofar as Applicant No.2 is concerned,
firstly she is a lady and secondly it is rather difficult to believe
that the incident could have taken place in the manner in which
it is alleged because the informant's mother was in the vicinity.
In her presence, the Applicant No.2 or her husband could not
have committed this offence. Hence it is rather difficult to
believe that the incident had taken place in the manner in which
it is described.
7. In this view of the matter, the custodial interrogation
of even Applicant No.2 is not necessary. But she is required to
attend the police station for the purposes of investigation.
Hence, the following order :
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 11/07/2019 22:42:04 :::
5/5 22-ABA-1345-19.odt
ORDER
(i) In the event of their arrest in connection with C.R.No.153/19 registered with Sangola Police Station, Solapur, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each, with one or two sureties each, in the like amount.
(ii) The Applicants shall attend Sangola Police Station from 17/07/2019 to 19/07/2019 between 03.00 to 05.00 p.m. and shall cooperate with the investigation.
(iii) The Applicant No.2 shall be interrogated in the presence of a lady police officer.
(iv) Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 11/07/2019 22:42:04 :::