MHNS010044992020
Order below Exh.1
in Cri. Bail Application No.1650/2020.

{Pankaj Khanderao Kadale vs. State}
This is an application under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of bail pending trial.

2.

Brief facts giving rise to this application can be narrated as follows.

The applicant came to be arrested on 23.11.2020 in Crime No.190/2020 for the offence punishable under sections 306, 498­A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Vani Police Station, Nashik on the accusation that Vaishali Pankaj Kadale ­deceased committed suicide on 3.11.2020 by burning herself. The applicant­accused being husband of deceased Bharati Pankaj Kadale and co­accused being his relatives subjected her to cruelty and abetted the commission of suicide.

3.The applicant contended that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. There is nothing on record to show his involvement in the commission of offence. He is behind bar from the date of his arrest. Investigation is almost completed.

Nothing is to be recovered or discovered from him. Therefore, his further detention is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. He is having permanent place of abode and roots in the society. He is ready to furnish the surety to the satisfaction of this Court and also ready to abide by the conditions, if any, imposed by this Court. Coaccused already released on bail. On these lines, he has prayed for bail pending trial.

4.The respondent State filed its reply and inter­alia denied all the adverse allegations made by the applicant and reiterated prosecution case. There is prima­facie sufficient material on record to show the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence. If the accused is released on bail, he may hamper or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. On these lines, respondent State has prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

5.Heard learned advocate Mr. Bhalerao appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned A.P.P. Mr.Gaikwad. I have also perused the investigation papers made available by the Investigating Officer as well as the documents filed on behalf of informant and written notes of arguments. It appears from the papers that the marriage between the deceased Bharati Pankaj Kadale and applicant solemnized on 15.07.2013. On 03.11.2020, the deceased had sustained burn injuries and on 08.11.2020, she succumbed to the injuries. It further appears from the documents that on the next day of incident i.e. on 04.11.2020, the statement of deceased was recorded wherein she did not make any allegations against the applicant. However, according to prosecution, thereafter the deceased had narrated entire incident to her mother­informant. It is also submitted on behalf of the informant that the accused are pressurizing the witnesses for settlement of the matter. The applicant had doubt about character of deceased because of which she has committed suicide. The Investigation of offence is in progress. Though the co­accused are already released on bail, the role attributed to the applicant as well as co­accused is different. Even the possibility of tampering of prosecution witnesses can not be ruled out.

Therefore, in my opinion, at this stage, the applicant does not deserve for bail. With this, I proceed to pass the following order.

O R D E R
1 Application stands rejected.

( Smt. S.C. Jadhav ) 07th December, 2020. Additional Sessions Judge­ 8, Nashik.