High Court
Facts
1BA2196.2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD922 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2196 OF 2024SANGITA W/O RAJKUMAR KAMBLEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA...Advocate for Applicant : Mr. P. P. MoreAPP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. B. Patil...CORAM :ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.DATE :20.06.2025P.C. : 1]Heard learned counsel for the applicant and thelearned APP for the respondent-State. 2]The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrestedon 10.07.2024 in connection with Crime No.0336/2024,dated 10.07.2024, registered with Chakur Police Station,District Latur, for the offences punishable under Section103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3]The case as put up by the prosecution in theFIR, which was lodged by Sanjiv Kishan Kamble brother-in-law of the accused alleging that on 09.07.2024 the presentapplicant / wife of the deceased has killed the decease bybeating him by polpat (wooden rolling board used to makechapaties) on the head, face (eye) and legs, so also, it is 2BA2196.2024stated that there were ligature marks seen on the neck. Assuch, the offence was registered against the applicant forhaving committed murder of her husband.4]The applicant was arrested on 10.07.2024..thereafter, the charge-sheet is filed on 06.10.2024. The bailapplication is rejected by the trial court, as such, theapplicant has approached before this court.5]The learned counsel for the applicant submitsthat the evidence on record is only of the eye witness of thechild, who has seen the crime. He submits that the allegedincident is out of the quarrel. Assault was initially by thehusband against the wife and the wife in defence assaultedthe deceased, who has died. He also submits that themedical evidence indicates that the death is due to cardio-respiratory arrest, due to hypovolemic shock caused byinjuries and that there is no other major injuries. There is nointention to cause death.6]Per contra, the learned APP submits that thereis clear eye witness evidence available i.e. the child agedabout 10 years of the deceased and that the eye witness on09.07.2024 has stated that the applicant has assaulted thevictim by use of polpat and when the deceased had fallendown thereafter the applicant has strangulated his father(deceased) thereafter she left the deceased injured on the
Legal Reasoning
3BA2196.2024cot and they (child and mother) went to the house of one ofthe known friend of her child and returned back on nextday morning, when they found the deceased still on the cot.He was found dead lying on the cot. As such, the learnedAPP submits that there is intention to kill the deceased. Noattempt was made to give help to the deceased, when hewas lying injured.7]Having considered the rival submissions, primafacie, the evidence is of the child witness, who in hisstatement has stated before the Magistrate that on09.07.2024, when his mother had come home from field hisfather had called her darling. At that time, the motherslapped his father. Thereafter, there was quarrel betweenhis father and mother. Thereafter the child witness statedthat he has called the neighbour Shankarbhaiyya, who hasresolved the dispute. Thereafter, his father left the houseand came back later. When he returned back there wasagain quarrel between his deceased father and mother andfather was beating his mother. Thereafter, she closed thedoor. Thereafter, again after some time she opened the doorand had hit back his father with polpat on the head. Hisfather felled on the cot. Thereafter, mother took a jutestring and pulled it along the neck of his father. Thereafterthe father makes sound of “ah ah” and stayed silent there.Thereafter, his mother told him not to tell any one.Thereafter, mother and he had been to his friend’s house 4BA2196.2024and came back next day morning. At that time his deceasedfather was still lying on the cot.8]The evidence of the child would indicate thatthere was quarrel followed by fight between the deceasedand the applicant. The fight was on innocuous reason butthere would be constant quarrels between the couple; as isseen from other statements. The deceased had beaten theapplicant and, thereafter, the applicant has hit back usingpolpat.9]The medical evidence indicates injuries asunder:“- Lacerated wounds = 4X3X2 cm2 cm below another lacerated of forehead = 2X3X2cm seen on Right side of forehead and oozing ofblood from top of back occipital joint injury 0-dX1 cmseen; from this blood oozing- Black coloured band = 2X2 cm seen infront of neckbut not seen backside and flexible neck.-Front side below band # of cartilage as such notobserved.”10]The opinion of death is as under:“...death most probably due to cardio-respiratory arrest, due to hypovolemic shockcaused by injuries. However exact cause ofdeath will be given after the chemical analysisreport of viscera. 11]From the medical evidence it appears that death 5BA2196.2024was due to hypovolemic shok, which largely mean internalloss of large amount of blood that has resulted in cardiorespiratory arrest.The injuries as noted in clause 17 of the post-mortem report does not indicate fracture injury. Even onthe neck, it is stated that there is no fracture. There is noligature mark on back of neck and front side below band ofcartilage fracture as such is not observed.12]From the entire scene; as noted, it is obviousthat there was no intention of killing. There was quarrelfollowed by fight and the applicant has hit the deceasedhusband with the polpat. 13]Spot-panchnama would indicate that when thedeceased was seen lying on the iron cot, there were injurieson the forehead and that there was a black ligature mark onthe neck of the deceased. 14]Considering the usage of the string and thepolpat, apparently, the accused / applicant did not intend tokill the deceased but that action was a retaliatory fight.There is no grievous injury caused, no fracture sustained bydeceased. When the deceased had fallen on the bed theapplicant or her son possibly have not understood thegravity of the situation. They did not understand that thedeceased would pass away by a hypovolemic shock or that 6BA2196.2024the deceased has suffered cardio respiratory arrest. Theintention prima facie was to cause injury and it was inretaliation of the fight between the husband and the wife.15]Considering this aspect of the matter and alsoconsidering that the applicant is arrested on 10.07.2024and the applicant is in jail for about 1 year and that theapplicant’s son is of 10 years to look after, it would beappropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail.16]In view of the above, the application is allowedin the following terms : a]The applicant shall be released on bail inconnection with Crime No.0336/2024, dated10.07.2024, registered with Chakur Police Station,District Latur, for the offences punishable underSection 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,on furnishing PR bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or twosureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of thetrial Court. b]The applicant, upon being released on bail,shall not contact the informant, in any mannerwhatsoever, during the pendency of the trial. c]The applicant shall co-operate with the trial 7BA2196.2024Court and he shall attend each and every date, unlessexempted by the trial Court.d]The applicant shall not tamper with theevidence of the prosecution and he shall not influencethe informant, witnesses and other persons concernedwith the case. e]The applicant, upon being released on bail,shall place on record of the trial Court the details ofhis Contact Number and residential address withupdates in case of any change. 17]Needless to say, in case of violation of any ofthe aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicantshall be liable to be cancelled. 18]It is also clarified that the observations made inthis order are limited to the disposal of the present bailapplication. The concerned Court shall proceed further inthe matter without being influenced by the observationsmade hereinabove. 19]The application stands disposed of. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe