CNR
MHNS010032812022
Order below Exh.1
in Cri. Bail Application No.813/2022.
( Vanita Sitaram Gaikar Vs State)
This application is moved by the applicants­accused Vanita
Sitaram Gaikar under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for
grant of bail in connection with CR No.138/2022 registered with MIDC
Sinnar Police Station, Tal. Sinnar, Dist. Nashik for the offence under
section 302, 201, 181 of the Indian Penal Code on 20.5.2022.
2.

It is stated in the application that applicant­accused was
arrested on 21.5.2022 and remanded to the police custody upto
24.5.2022 and since then applicant­accused is in magistrate custody.
The first information report was registered by ASI Gorakshnath Balak.
Initially the AD was registered by applicant­accused herself vide
No.26/2022 informing to the MIDC police station that on 19.5.2022 at
about 7.30 p.m. that her husband Sitaram Gaikar committed suicide by
hanging himself in a residential premises. However, during the course
of inquiry/investigation of the said AD police suspected that Vanita has
given false information to the police. Meanwhile inquest panchanama
and post mortem was conducted and the medical officer has opined
that death is due to asphyxia due to ligature strangulation. It is
disclosed during the interrogation that on 19.5.2022 at about 6.30
p.m. her husband Sitaram who was present in the house received
phone call of the sister­in­law of Vanita and therefore, deceased
Sitaram demanded Rs.6,000/­ so as to pay installment of Bhishi.
However, Vanita refused to give said amount to her husband and
therefore, there was verbal altercation between husband and wife and
Vanita strangulated her husband with a nylon rope and thereby
committed murder of her husband.

..2..

3.

It is stated in the application that applicant­accused is
working as agricultural labour and on the day of incident also she had
worked for entire day and returned home and saw that her husband
committed suicide. Her husband was an alcoholic and was taking
money for consumption of alcohol from various persons so as to satisfy
his addiction. It is also stated that the medical evidence placed on
record is weak piece of evidence and only on the basis of the said
evidence the present applicant­accused may not be detained behind the
bar.
4.

It is also stated that, applicant­accused is having two
children who are taking education. Their educational future will be
hampered, if the applicant­accused is detained behind the bar. These
and other ground set out in the application, prayed for bail.
5.

I.O. PSI Shri. Tribhuvan present and submitted his report
and opposed the bail application. The learned APP also filed his say
and submitted to reject the application.
6.

Perused the record. Heard both the parties.

7.

The learned counsel for applicant­accused Adv. Mandar
Bhanose submitted during the course of his arguments that applicant­
accused is belonging to poor family. She herself is working to feed her
children. The deceased was drunked person and has committed the
suicide and the applicant­accused herself reported the matter to the
police. Her children are depending on her. So far as confession given
by the applicant­accused is concerned, it is not admissible in the
evidence as it is a confession before the police. So far as medical
evidence is concerned, it is a weak piece of evidence and only on the
Cri. Bail Application No.813/2022.
..3..

basis of the medical evidence, the applicant­accused may not be denied
the present bail. He further submitted that applicant­accused is a local
resident, her antecedents are clean, she will not jump the bail, she will
abide by the condition laid down by this Court. She will also co­operate
to the police in the investigation and will attend the police station as
and when required by the police.
8.

On the other hand, learned APP Shri. Suryvanshi submitted
that applicant­accused who committed murder of her husband had
given false information to the police and pretended that her husband
has committed suicide by hanging himself to the ceiling and thus,
totally misguided the entire investigating machinery. It is the
investigating officer who has visited the spot of incident and also
sought medical evidence and therefore, the present crime unearthed
with due care and precaution taken by the police while conducting
investigation of present case. Therefore, he submitted that considering
the fact that the witnesses are relatives and applicant­accused may
influence and the fact that investigation is at initial stage. Hence, bail
application may be rejected.
9.

I have carefully gone through the entire record placed
before me. Initially AD was registered on the information submitted by
the applicant­accused Vanita herself and the inquiry/investigation of
the said AD was conducted by ASI Gorakshnath Balak, who carried out
spot panchanama and inquest panchanama and send body for post
mortem to the Civil Hospital, Nashik and in the initial inquiry/
investigation of the said AD, it is disclosed that applicant­accused
herself strangulated the deceased by nylon rope and create a scene that
her husband had committed suicide. Necessary evidence is placed on
..4..

record. Investigation is at initial stage. The Investigating officer needs
to be given sufficient opportunity to investigate the matter in depth as
it is already mentioned above the applicant­accused misguided the
police machinery by submitting false information and therefore,
considering the fact that the applicant­accused is facing charges of
murder of her own husband and therefore, considering the seriousness
of the offence and the stage of the investigation, I am not inclined to
grant the bail application. The application is devoid of merit and liable
to be rejected. Hence, following order.
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.813/2022 is hereby rejected.

2.

Inform to concern police station.

SHINDE
MADHAV
A
Date­04.07.2022
Digitally signed by
SHINDE MADHAV
A
Date: 2022.07.04
18:26:29 +0530
( M. A. Shinde )
Additional Sessions Judge­9,
Nashik.