1 Cri.B.A.No.1165/22­Order­Ex.1.

Order below Exh.1 in Bail Application No. 1165/2022

Somnath Prakash Chaudhari .. Applicant / Accused.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra through Police Inspector, Deolali Camp Police Station, Deolali Camp. (Cr. No.I 75/2022) .. Prosecution

Order below Exh.1.

1.The applicant/accused Somnath Prakash Chaudhari claims bail in C.R. No. I­75/2022 for the offences punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Deolali Camp Police Station.

2.Heard Learned Advocate Shri R.J.Kasliwal, for the applicant, learned A.P.P. Smt. Sangale for the State. Perused the papers of investigation.

3.It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant sexually harassed the deceased/victim and thereby abettedinstigated the commission of suicide by both the victims.

4.Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant has no concern with the alleged offence. There is much delay in lodging report which itself is sufficient to show that the report is concocted one. The applicant has on his own gave statement before police and admitted that he had illicit relations with the wife of informant but has no concern with her daughter. Mobile recovered from the shop of accused has no any incriminating date, therefore, those were not seized. There is no any prima facie evidence to show that the applicant was in contact with victim before the incident. Allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated one. Even if the allegations are accepted for the sake of argument, it cannot be said that the circumstances were such that the deceased do not have any other option but to commit suicide. The applicant is behind bar since long. Now there is no any recovery or discovery as such remains from the applicant. Charge­sheet is filed and thereby the investigation is complete. Physical custody of the applicant is thus no more required. Therefore, ld. Advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant be released on bail.

5.Per contra, learned APP resisted the application with the contention that death of the wife of informant and of his daughter is apparently suicidal one. Messages are recovered which was received by the informant from the accused which is sufficient to indicate the act committed by the accused. The obscene photos and message sent by the accused is sufficient to show his concern with the alleged offence. There are statements of witnesses which shows that the accused had illicit relations with wife of informant and he used to blackmail her. Though investigation is complete, considering the nature of offence, if the applicant would be released on bail, it is possible that he may pressurize the witnesses and tamper with prosecution evidence.

Therefore, learned APP submitted to reject the application.

6.On perusal of record, it reveals that this is the successive bail application filed by the applicant after filing of charge­sheet by the investigating officer. Previous bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on merit. It was observed that, “the report is lodged after 40 days of the incident. But considering the nature of offence that is sexual harassment not only to the wife of informant but also to the daughter and consequent dis­reputation, it is but obvious that one should be reluctant to proceed with the matter. Such delay by itself cannot be said to be fatal at this prima facie stage.

Moreover, recovery of obscene photo and the message from the mobile of informant, which was received from the mobile of applicant­accused, shows the prima facie concern of the applicant with alleged offence. If at all, prima facie allegations are taken into consideration that is the sexual harassment and consistent threat of defamation of such type, would certainly lead to a lady in a compelling situation to commit suicide. Therefore, thorough investigation is required to be done to reveal the truth”.

7.Thus, with aforesaid observation, bail was rejected on merit. Moreover, on filing charge­sheet, statements of the witnesses recorded by the investigating officer reflect the concern of applicant with alleged offence. Evidentiary value of the said prima facie material can be decided during the trial only. In the same matter, photograph produced on record of the victim that she was in happy state on 09.05.2022 at the house of accused, cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. There is sufficient prima facie material on record to show the concern of applicant with the alleged offence. It reveals from the record that the witnesses are from the same vicinity. If the applicant would be released on bail, there is every possibility that he may pressurize the witnesses and tamper with evidence. Offence allegedly committed by the applicant is very much serious and heinous in nature. No any change in circumstance as such brought to the notice of this Court to consider the successive bail application filed by the applicant. As such no case is made out for grant of bail. Hence the order.

:: O R D E R ::

The application (Exh.1) stands rejected.

Digitally signed by ADITEE ADITEE UDAY UDAY KADAM KADAM Date: 2022.09.29 17:33:52 – 0600 Nashik. (Aditee U. Kadam) Date : 29.09.2022. Additional Sessions Judge­2, Nashik.