SAKHARAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants apprehending arrest in Crime No.316 of 2020 registered with Sonpeth Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 306, 498-A, 323, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, preferred this application seeking pre-arrest bail.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and learned APP representing the respondent/State. Perused the FIR as well as papers of the investigation.

(3.) In brief, it is contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and falsely implicated in the case on the basis of complaint lodged by the informant-brother of the deceased. By referring the allegations made in the complaint, learned Counsel submits that even if the allegations are accepted in its entirety, still it make out no case against the applicants to prosecute them for committing offences punishable under sections 306 , 498-A , 323 , 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that marriage of father of applicant No.1 and husband of applicant No.3-Laxman Jadhav with deceased Geetabai has taken place in the year 1962. She did not conceive child for a period of more than 10 years of her marriage. With the consent of deceased, second marriage of Laxman was performed with applicant No.3-Salubai, the mother of applicant No.1. Applicant No.2 is daughter-in- law of applicant No.3. In the complaint it is stated that the deceased was subjected to illtreatment and harassment by the applicants and due to the illtreatment and harassment, deceased might have committed suicide by jumping into river passing by the side of the village. It is pointed out that the informant himself stated in the complaint that on 10.09.2020, applicant No.1 contacted him on phone and enquired as to whether deceased Geetabai had come to his place. Later-on, the informant reached to their village and the applicants as well as the informant went in search of the deceased. On 11.09.2020 missing report was lodged with the police station. Subsequently, footwear and Lugade i.e. saree of the deceased found by the side of the river and therefore search was undertaken. Later-on, dead body was recovered in Mohala Shivar. In the complaint filed, the informant alleged that the deceased committed suicide due to illtreatment from the applicants which leads to registration of the offence. On the background of the allegations made in the complaint, learned Counsel submits that except the informant and his relatives, no other persons are alleging the illtreatment and harassment to the deceased at the hands of the applicants. In the facts and circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the deceased has committed suicide on account of illtreatment and harassment after a period of 45 years of her marriage with father of applicant No.1 and husband of applicant No.3. It is submitted that the facts stated in the FIR itself spell out that the deceased accidentally fell in the river which was over-flowing due to opening of doors of Jayakwadi dam. The deceased was old aged woman. She fell in the river while taking holy bath. The fact that sleepers of the deceased were lying by the side of the river bed, itself is sufficient to infer that the deceased died accidentally due to fall in the river while taking holy bath. It is further further submitted that the applicants are agriculturists by profession. They have movable property and permanent residents of village Mohala, Tq. Sonpeth, Dist. Parbhani. They have no past record of indulging into criminal activity. In the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.