POOJA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been flee uneer Section 428 of CrPC by the original accusee as he is appreheneing his arrest in connection with Crime No.495 of 2020, registeree with City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabae, for the ofences punishable uneer Section 306 , 506 reae with 34 of the IPC .

(2.) Heare learnee Aevocate Mr. J. M. Murkute for the applicant ane learnee Aeeitional Public Prosecutor Ms. R. P. Gour for responeent- State.

(3.) It has been vehemently submittee on behalf of the applicant that the FIR has been loegee by the mother of the eeceasee. In fact, the present applicant is the wife of the eeceasee. The mother-in-law alleges that accusee/applicant usee to pick up quarrels with the eeceasee. She was also levelling the allegation of impotency against the eeceasee, ane since last about seven to eight months, she hae gone to resiee with her parents. A notice for restitution was sent by the eeceasee, however the applicant hae not resumee cohabitation. She states that on 12-09-2020 he committee suiciee after the informant hae left the house. It is apparent from the FIR itself that applicant was not staying with the eeceasee when he committee suiciee, ane it is the allegation that, she was still abusing the eeceasee ane levelling allegation about impotency. It is also conteneee that eeceasee hae given amount of Rs.5 Lakh to the parents of the informant ane they were not returning it, however the FIR is silent as to exactly when the amount was exteneee ane no proof regareing exteneing that amount has been submittee. Taking into consieeration the allegations, the physical custoey of the applicant is not requiree for the purpose of investigation, ane therefore, she be releasee on bail.