Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Milind Govind Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 January, 2019

Author: Mangesh S. Patil

Bench: Mangesh S. Patil

                                      1                   BA.1555-18.odt

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               10 BAIL APPLICATION NO.1555 OF 2018

     Milind Govind Patil,
     Age : 39 years, Occu. Labour,
     R/o Saptashringi Colony, Mehrun,
     Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon.                         ...        Applicant

             Versus

     The State of Maharashtra                     ...        Respondent

                                ...
     Mr. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for Applicant
     Mr. S.P.Deshmukh, APP for Respondent-State
                                ...

                               CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
                               DATE : 15.01.2019

     PER COURT :-


             This is an application for bail under Section 439 of

     the Cr.P.C. by one of the accused from Crime No.257 of

     2018 registered with M.I.D.C. Police Station, Jalgaon for

     the offences punishable under Sections 302, 506 read

     with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.


     2.      Shortly stated the prosecution case is to the effect

     that the deceased was the wife of the brother of the

     present applicant. She was being harassed and insisted




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019                  ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                             2                        BA.1555-18.odt

     that she should bring back the gold bangles which she

     had kept with her father.                   It is alleged that on that

     count, she was forcibly administered poison and she

     died while she was cohabiting with the applicant and

     other in-laws.


     3.      According to the prosecution, she had written a

     note which she had forwarded to her uncle specifically

     alleging about in-laws having administered her poison.

     The incident had taken place in the night intervening

     21.09.2018 and 22.09.2018. She was taken to Ganpati

     Hospital, Jalgaon where she breathed her last on the

     same day at 7.30 a.m. The doctor reported the matter to

     police.        Accidental Death Case was registered. The

     inquiry       was conducted.                 Her brother            Bhausaheb

     thereafter lodged the FIR alleging that the deceased had

     made an oral dying declaration and had told him about

     her     father-in-law,          brother-in-law         i.e.   the    applicant

     having caught hold her hands, her mother-in-law having

     caught        hold        her   legs       and   the     husband        having

     administered poison to her and thereafter she went to




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019                            ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                  3                      BA.1555-18.odt

     the next room, wrote a chit which she had sent on a

     WhatsApp to her uncle. The crime was registered. The

     applicant was arrested on 22.09.2018 and is now

     claiming bail, after filing of the charge-sheet.


     4.      The learned advocate for the applicant submits

     that accepting the chit at its face value it does not

     specifically attribute any overt act to the applicant

     muchless about he having caught hold her hands with

     her father-in-law facilitating her husband to administer

     her poison. It is only by way of improvement that the

     informant and few other witnesses are coming with an

     oral dying declaration pointing out even the role played

     by the present applicant.       It is submitted that the in-

     laws themselves had admitted her in the hospital. She

     herself had given the history. The record of the Ganpati

     Hospital, Jalgaon clearly reads the history about

     consumption of poison.      At this juncture, except such

     improved version in the FIR and the statements of some

     of the witnesses, there is absolutely no material to

     prima facie show that the applicant had any grudge




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019                ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                 4                     BA.1555-18.odt

     against the deceased or had any motive to see her dead

     or to have actually taken part in administering her

     poison.


     5.      The learned advocate would further submit that

     going by the statements in the chit, it seems highly

     improbable that after having forcibly administered

     poison she could have found time to write this lengthy

     chit by going to the next room and even to take its photo

     and transmit it to her uncle. No plausible explanation

     can be comprehended as to why she had not made a call

     to any of her nearest relative rather than transmitting it

     to the uncle. It is under these circumstances, when the

     investigation is already complete and the material on

     record points out a possibility of she having consumed

     poison, when there are no criminal antecedents and

     there is no possibility of applicant tampering with

     evidence, he may be granted bail.


     6.      The learned APP opposes the application.                He

     submits that at this juncture minute scanning of the

     material collected by the Investigating Officer is not




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019              ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                   5                    BA.1555-18.odt

     permissible. Going by the chit written by the deceased,

     the in-laws and her husband had administered her

     poison.        She has made oral dying declaration to her

     brother Bhausaheb who is the informant and even to

     her cousin Atul Sukhdeo Patil.      This much of material

     at this juncture is sufficient to reveal complicity of the

     applicant in commission of the crime.          The offence is

     serious and punishable upto death. Therefore, the

     applicant may not be granted bail.


     7.      Indeed, this is not a stage where the material

     collected by the Investigating Officer has to be scanned

     threadbare to ascertain veracity or otherwise of the

     prosecution story. However, simultaneously one needs

     to discern the facts and circumstances as have been

     sought to be made out by the prosecution.                       The

     prosecution has been heavily relying upon the chit

     wherein the deceased had allegedly stated about the in-

     laws and husband having forcibly administered her

     poison. She had quoted the reason as well. However, as

     is pointed out by the learned advocate for the applicant,




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019               ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                    6                    BA.1555-18.odt

     this was the first occasion for the deceased to make a

     truthful disclosure.      She had found time to write this

     lengthy chit and still has not specifically attributed any

     overt act to the applicant. It is only after she has died

     that her brother Bhausaheb and her cousin Atul

     Sukhdeo Patil have come out with a sort of improvement

     wherein she is alleged to have told them that the

     applicant along with her father-in-law had caught hold

     her hands and it is thereafter that the husband had

     administered her poison.          Thus there is apparent

     material inconsistency between the chit allegedly left

     behind by the deceased and the oral dying declaration

     allegedly made to Bhausaheb and Atul.


     8.      Except the material discussed herein above in the

     form of chit and the oral dying declaration there is

     absolutely no material to reveal complicity of the

     applicant in perpetrating the crime.               The in-laws

     themselves had taken the deceased to the hospital. It is

     under these circumstances, in my considered view when

     the investigation is already over and the charge-sheet




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2019                ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::
                                       7                      BA.1555-18.odt

     has been filed and a trial is not likely to get over in a

     foreseeable future, the applicant deserves to be released

     on bail. Hence, I pass the following order :

                                    ORDER

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant be released on bail on his executing a Personal Recognizance for an amount of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing a solvent surety in the like amount subject to the condition that 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 - 15/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2019 12:57:53 :::