ABDUL HAKIM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admitted. Heard finally by consent. Heard Mr. Firdos Mirza, learned counsel for the applicant; Mr A.D. Sonak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant No. 1-State and Mr. N.B. Bargat, learned counsel for non-applicants 2 and 3. Non-applicant No. 1 is the State of Maharashtra. This is an Application moved by father of deceased-lady, by name, Mrs. Nasreen @ Farha, who had allegedly committed suicide on 22.1.2013.

(2.) The deceased was married to non-applicant No. 2 - Mohammed Asif Mohd. Aslam. She was staying with him in the matrimonial home situated at village Darwha. The non-applicant No. 3 is the brother of non-applicant No. 2 and is a College-going boy. The deceased had allegedly committed suicide due to harassment on the part of non-applicants 2 and 3 on account of dowry and other family matters. The matter was reported to the police by the applicant. The offence punishable under sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against non-applicants 2 and 3 and mother of non-applicants 2 and 3. The mother of non-applicants 2 and 3 has been released on anticipatory bail. The State has not filed any Application challenging the said order. As far as non-applicants 2 and 3 are concerned, they had applied for grant of bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide their Application No. 21/2013. The said Application came to be rejected on 14.2.2013. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had observed in his order that the investigation was in progress and that the post-mortem report had not been received by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) Briefly stated, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge was of the view that since investigation was in progress, the non-applicants 2 and 3 were not entitled for bail. Later on, a fresh bail Application was moved before the same learned Additional Sessions Judge by non-applicants 2 and 3. The said Application came to be decided on 5th March, 2013. The non-applicants 2 and 3 were granted bail in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each and certain conditions were imposed on them.

(3.) The present applicant, who is the father of the deceased lady, has moved this Court for cancellation of bail. The non-applicant No. 1 is the State of Maharashtra. The learned Addl. P.P. Mr A.D. Sonak represents the non-applicant No. 1. The non-applicant No. 1 supports the prayer of the applicant. As far as the locus of the applicant is concerned, it is well-settled by now that in such a case, father of the deceased-lady can make an Application for cancellation of bail. Therefore, the objections raised on behalf of the non-applicant 2 and 3 has no substance. At the same time, it may be mentioned here that after having gone through the papers, I am of the view that the Application for cancellation of bail of non-applicant No. 3 needs to be dismissed.