Ankush Dagadu Salunkhe And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 9144 Bom

Megha                                        19_IA_1257_2021.doc


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1257 OF 2021
                                       IN
                         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.368 OF 2021

1) Ankush Dagadu Salunkhe
2) Shalan Dagadu Salunkhe                                ...Applicants
                      Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                ...Respondent
                                  ....
Mr. Purushottam Chavan i/b. Mr. Rajesh S. Jadhav for the Applicants.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent-State.


                                        CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED: 14th JULY, 2021.

P.C.:-

This is an application under Section 389 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of substantive order of

sentence imposed by judgment dated 12/03/2021 passed by learned

Sessions Judge, Sangli in Sessions Case No.112 of 2015 and to enlarge

the Applicants on bail.

2. The Applicant No.1 is the husband and the Applicant No.2 is

the mother-in-law of the deceased- Jyoti Salunkhe, who committed

suicide on 25/02/2015. Pursuant to the FIR lodged by the father of said

Jyoti, crime No.26 of 2015 was registered against the accused for

Megha 19_IA_1257_2021.doc

offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 r/w. 34 of the IPC.

Learned Judge after considering the evidence has held the Applicants

guilty of offence punishable under Section 498-A r/w 34 of the IPC and

sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay

fine of Rs.25,000/- i/d to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one

year. They are also convicted for offence punishable under Section 306

of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years

and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- i/d they shall suffer further rigorous

imprisonment for three years. Aggrieved by the conviction and

sentence, the Applicants have filed an appeal, pending which they have

prayed for suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicants and learned

APP for the Respondent-State. Perused the records and considered the

submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties.

4. Evidence of PW1-father of the deceased indicates that the

Applicant No.1 and his daughter Jyoti were married on 02/09/2011.

They have a child through the said wedlock, born in the year 2012. The

evidence of PW1 indicates that the accused treated Jyoti well for about

one year. Thereafter they started harassing her with demands of

dowry. Evidence of the father of the deceased prima facie indicates

that Jyoti had returned to her matrimonial home, about three months

Megha 19_IA_1257_2021.doc

after the child birth. This evidence indicates that she returned home

after about 15 days and told him that her husband i.e. the Applicant

No.1 was demanding two tolas of gold and money for purchasing a

tempo. Evidence of the witnesses further indicates that the accused ill-

treated Jyoti for not meeting his demands. This witness had intervened

and tried to resolve the dispute. He had told the Applicants that he was

not able to meet their demands and requested them not to ill-treat his

daughter. The complainant states that the Applicants continued to

harass and subject Jyoti to cruelty. Records also prima facie indicate

that said Jyoti had lodged a complaint on 02/12/2014 against both the

Applicants specifically stating that the Applicants were demanding

money and gold and that they were subjecting her to cruelty. She had

also alleged that she had run away from the house while the Applicant

No.1 had gone to the other room to get the Kerocine Can to set her

ablaze. Pursuant to the said complaint, crime was registered against

both these Applicants for an offence punishable under Section 498A of

the IPC. Jyoti committed suicide within two months from the date of

lodging of the said FIR. The post mortem report reveals that she was

20-24 weeks pregnant on the date of committing suicide.

4. The records reveal that the death of Jyoti was within 7 years

from the date of marriage. The material on record prima facie indicates

Megha 19_IA_1257_2021.doc

that soon before her death, Jyoti was subjected to cruelty and

harassment. Prima facie there is live link between the effect of cruelty

due to dowry demand and the death of Jyoti, which gives rise to

presumption under Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act.

5. Considering the above mentioned facts, I am not inclined to

to suspend sentence imposed against the Applicant No.1. However,

considering the fact that the Applicant No.2 is a woman of advanced

age, substantive sentence against her is suspended pending disposal of

the appeal on merits on following terms and conditions:-

(i) The Applicant No.2 is ordered to be released on bail on

furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- with one or two

sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

Trial Court.

(ii) The Applicant shall report to the Trial Court, once in six

months on the day/date specified by the Trial Court, till

the appeal is finally disposed of.

(iii) The Applicant shall keep the Trial Court informed of her

current address and mobile contact numbers and/or

change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time

to time.

Megha 19_IA_1257_2021.doc

(iv) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing

before the Trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a

report to the High Court and the prosecution would be

at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of

bail.

6. The application stands disposed of in above terms.

(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)