✦ Bombay High Court · 17 Apr 2007

Sheetal Sajjan Ghodke v. State of Maharashtra

V K TAHILRAMANI2 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
17 Apr 2007
Bench
V K TAHILRAMANI

Outcome

Disposed of

Application is disposed of

Key paragraphs

  • Para 77. Application is disposed of. [Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.]

Judgment

... Mr.S.V.Kotwal Advocate for Applicant Mr.K.V.Saste A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : APRIL 17, 2007 DATE : APRIL 17, 2007 DATE : APRIL 17, 2007 P.C.P.C. P.C.

1.

Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.19 of 2007 of Vairag Police Station. The said case is under Section 302 of IPC.

3.

It is the prosecution case that the applicant who is a young lady, has murdered her son aged about one and half year. The complainant is the husband of the applicant. The said FIR has been lodged by the complainant seven months after the death of the minor child. FIR has been preceded by [-2-] bitter litigation between the parties which has resulted in the complaint under Section 498-A of IPC being filed by the present applicant against her husband and in laws. She has also filed proceedings for maintenance. On the other hand, the husband has initiated divorce proceedings against the applicant.

4.

In the present case the complainant has stated that on the day prior to the death of the child, the complainant and his wife (applicant) had quarrel. On the next day in the morning, the mother of the complainant saw the applicant sitting near the child and the child was dead. The post mortem which was carried out on the next day, did not show any external injuries. However, Doctor opined that cause of death was ‘asphyxia’. The applicant is a young lady. She has minor daughter who is aged about seven years.

5.

The death of the minor child occurred in June,

2006. Looking to the facts of this case, I am of the opinion that at this stage, the custody of the applicant would not be necessary. Looking to the fact that there is a delay of seven months in [-3-] lodging the FIR and other facts and circumstances of this case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

6.

In the event of arrest, the applicant to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.ten thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount in C.R.No.19 of 2007 of Vairag Police Station. The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station twice in a fortnight till the conclusion of trial.

Operative part

7.

Application is disposed of. [Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.]

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Application is disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 17 Apr 2007. The bench was V K TAHILRAMANI.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments