(Order below Exh.1) B.A.No.1179/2022 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK AT
NASHIK BAIL APPLICATION NO.1179 OF 2022

1. Hemlata Parvesh Jadhav, ]
2. Prakash Chintaman Pawar, ]
3. Chandrakala Prakash Pawar, ] Applicants/ accused
R/o. Gantura, Tal.Surgana, Dist.Nashik. ]

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent / Through– P.I. Surgana Police Station) ] prosecution

Advocate Shri.R.Y.Patil for the applicants/accused.

APP Shri.Kadave for the State.

ORDER BELOW EXH.1

This is bail application u/s.439 of Criminal Procedure Code for offence punishable u/s. 306 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code in C.R.No.42/2022 registered at Surgana Police Station.

2. Facts of the prosecution case is that the engagement ceremony took place between applicant’s son Parvesh alongwith applicant no.1 Hemlata. As per the customary practice of Adiwasi people with Hindu Ritual (पेण)/(साखरपुडा) engagement done between deceased Parvesh and applicant no.1. Accordingly, she went for cohabitation to Parvesh house at Post – Gantura, Tal. Surgana, Dist.Nashik. But in some days deceased Parvesh started taking suspicion on applicant no.1. He abused her in filthy language and assaulted daily. He also threatened to kill. Accordingly, she returned back to maternal home. Subsequently, Parvesh went to his matrimonial home and started staying their only. Prior to two months of incident Hemlata purchased mobile phone without consent of Parvesh and dispute started between both of them. Father-in-law of Pravesh Mr.Prakash Pawar informed about the incident to complainant Mr.Hansraj Rama Jadhav (father of the deceased). Hemlata/applicant
started doing job in company and despite of resistance by the Parvesh.

Therefore, again there was dispute started between both of them.

Chandrakala, Prakash and Hemlata i.e. mother-in-law, father-in-law and wife (all applicants) started abusing Parvesh. On 14.09.2022 Parvesh informed on telephone message to informant’s daughter Hemanti that, dispute took place between Parvesh and Hemlata and all applicants assaulted him by fists and kicks blows and also abused him and he is leaving matrimonial home. Subsequently, she tried to call Parvesh but she could not connect with him. Hemanti informed about the telephonic message on 15.09.2022 to informant. Accordingly, informant and his family members decided to go Gantura at Parvesh matrimonial home but due to heavy rain fall and non-availability of vehicle they did not go to there. On 16.9.2022 Hemanti received pone call from Surgana that her brother is dead. He informed that Parvesh had committed suicide due to harassment by the applicants.

Accordingly, offence registered under Section 306 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.Facts of the applicants’ case is that, they are falsely implicated. One complaint dated 15.09.2022 was filed against the husband (deceased) by his wife Hemlata (applicant no.1) for harassment at the instance of deceased and threat to drink poison.

4.I have heard Ld. Adv.Shri.R.Y.Patil for the applicants, who vehemently submitted that alleged incident occurred on 16.092022, pone call was dated 14.09.2022, the alleged incident occurred on 16.09.2022. Whereas the FIR is lodged on 19.09.2022. It is to be taken into consideration that the complaint dated 15.09.2022 has been filed by application no.1 against the deceased.

5.I have heard Ld. APP Shri.Kadave, who pithily submitted that there is direct involvement of the accused. I.O. is present.

6.Heard both side. Perused complaint of applicant no.1. Ld. Adv. Shri.Patil placed reliance on the following case laws –
(1) Gurucharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, Laws(SC) 2020-10-9,
(2) Mainabai Gunwant Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra, Laws (BOM) – 2021-2-137.

(3) Sunilkumar Rajeshwarprasad Sinha Vs. State of Gujrat, Cr.M.A.21478/2021, order dated 8.3.2022.

(4) Shabbir Hussain Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, Laws(SC) 2021-7-86.

7. After perusal of the case law, with due respect, the facts of the cited case laws are applicable to the case in hand. It is settled principal of the law as discussed above that there should be nexus between overt act at the instance of the accused and death of victim. After perusal of the FIR prima-facie there is act of offence. Whereas, applicants are in jail since last week. No purpose is required to keep them behind jail in such case. There are no criminal antecedents. Prima-facie, looking into the nature of the allegations they are entitled to release on bail. Hence, order –

ORDER

1.Bail Application below Exh.1 is allowed.

2.Applicant/accused Hemlata Parvesh Jadhav, Prakash Chintaman Pawar, Chandrakala Prakash Pawar be released on bail in C.R.No.42/2022 registered with Surgana Police Station for an offence punishable under Sections-u/s. 306 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code on furnishing P.R.Bond of Rs.15,000/-each (Rs.Fifteen Thousand Only) with one or two surety in like amount on following conditions.

(a) They shall attend Surgana Police Station on every Monday in between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till filing
of charge-sheet.

(b) They shall not pressure ze the prosecution witnesses and his family members and also come in contact in any way with them and co-operate the investigation agency.

(c) They shall not repeat the offence.

(d) If, they breach any of the abovesaid conditions it would be a cause to cancel the bail.

3.Criminal Bail Application stands disposed of accordingly.

Digitally signed by UMESHCHANDRA UMESHCHANDRA JAIKUMAR MORE JAIKUMAR MORE Date: 2022.10.01 14:59:46 +0530 (Dr. U.J. More) Nashik. Additional Sessions Judge Date : 01.10.2022 Nashik.