Bharat Laxman Pardhi vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 7644 Bom

                                                         1 of 4                 18-ia-2237-22


                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2237 OF 2022
                                                    IN
                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 747 OF 2022

                     Bharat laxman Pardhi                                 ..Applicant.
                          Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                      ..Respondents

                                                 __________
                     Mr. Aniket Nikam i/b. Piyush R. Toshnival for Applicant.
                     Mr. Y. Y. Dabke APP for State/Respondent No.1.
                                                 __________

                                              CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                                              DATE : 4th AUGUST 2022
                     PC :

                     1.           This is an application for bail pending the hearing of

                     Appeal. The Appeal is already admitted.


                     2.           Heard Shri. Aniket Nikam, learned counsel for the

                     Applicant and Shri. Dabke, learned APP for the State.


                     3.           The prosecution case is that, the applicant was married

                     to his wife Kalpana on 19/04/1999. She committed suicide on

                     13/11/2012. In the meantime, the couple had one daughter and

                     two sons. It is the case of prosecution that, the deceased was
        Digitally
        signed by
        VINOD
VINOD   BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
        2022.08.05
        11:31:22
        +0530
                      Gokhale
                                    2 of 4                   18-ia-2237-22


harassed by the applicant and his mother on demand of

Rs.30,000/-. There are also allegations that the applicant was

having illicit affair with the original accused No.3 and was causing

humiliation and harassment to the deceased. The applicant was

original accused No.1, his mother was accused No.2 and that third

lady was the accused No.3. Accused Nos.2 and 3 were acquitted.

The applicant who was accused No.1 was convicted for

commission of offence punishable U/s.498A of IPC and was

sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of

Rs.15,000/- and in default to suffer R.I. for 6 months. He was also

convicted for commission of offence punishable U/s.306 of IPC

and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 years and to pay a fine of

Rs.25,000/- and in default to suffer R.I. for 12 months.


4.        Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the

incident had taken place after about more than 12 years from the

marriage. Therefore, presumption U/s.113 of Indian Evidence Act

will not be applicable against the applicant. He submitted that the

act attributed to the applicant will        not amount to 'abetment'

within the meaning of Section 107 r/w. Section 306 of IPC. The
                                    3 of 4                  18-ia-2237-22


applicant was on bail during trial and he has not committed any

other offence. He has not misused the liberty. The maximum

sentence is of 5 years and the appeal is not likely to be taken up

for hearing within that period.


5.        Learned APP opposed this application and submitted

that, there is sufficient evidence to show that, there was unlawful

demand of Rs.30000/- and on that count, the deceased was

harassed. Apart from that, the applicant was having illicit relations

with the accused No.3 and was causing humiliation which has

resulted in deceased's taking this extreme step.


6.        I have considered these submissions and I have perused

the Judgment, as well as, depositions of the witnesses. The

prosecution has examined PW-1 mother of the deceased, PW-4

father of the deceased and PW-5 brother of the deceased. Their

evidence is on similar lines. However, PW-5 brother of the

deceased has not deposed about demand of Rs.30000/-. He has

stuck to the story of illicit relations between the applicant and

accused No.3. He was declared hostile. The I.O. was not examined.
                                       4 of 4                 18-ia-2237-22


The deceased had committed suicide after about 12 years of her

marriage. Whether the reason for her committing suicide was

harassment caused due to non fulfillment of demand of

Rs.30000/- or because the applicant was having illicit relations

with the accused No.3 will have to be considered. Whether such

affair caused her harassment to such a degree which would attract

Section 107 r/w. Section 306 of IPC. is another question to be

considered. More importantly, maximum sentence imposed is of 5

years and the Appeal is not likely to be decided within that period.

Therefore, the applicant can be released on bail during pendency

of this Appeal.


7.        Hence, the following order:

                                    ORDER

i) During pendency and final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.747 of 2022, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii) The Application is disposed off.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)