1 BA2196.2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 922 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2196 OF 2024 SANGITA W/O RAJKUMAR KAMBLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. P. P. More APP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. B. Patil ... CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 20.06.2025 P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State. 2] The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrested on 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 Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3] The case as put up by the prosecution in the FIR, which was lodged by Sanjiv Kishan Kamble brother-in- law of the accused alleging that on 09.07.2024 the present applicant / wife of the deceased has killed the decease by beating him by polpat (wooden rolling board used to make chapaties) on the head, face (eye) and legs, so also, it is 2025:BHC-AUG:15766 2 BA2196.2024 stated that there were ligature marks seen on the neck. As such, the offence was registered against the applicant for having 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 bail application is rejected by the trial court, as such, the applicant has approached before this court. 5] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the evidence on record is only of the eye witness of the child, who has seen the crime. He submits that the alleged incident is out of the quarrel. Assault was initially by the husband against the wife and the wife in defence assaulted the deceased, who has died. He also submits that the medical evidence indicates that the death is due to cardio- respiratory arrest, due to hypovolemic shock caused by injuries and that there is no other major injuries. There is no intention to cause death. 6] Per contra, the learned APP submits that there is clear eye witness evidence available i.e. the child aged about 10 years of the deceased and that the eye witness on 09.07.2024 has stated that the applicant has assaulted the victim by use of polpat and when the deceased had fallen down thereafter the applicant has strangulated his father (deceased) thereafter she left the deceased injured on the 3 BA2196.2024 cot and they (child and mother) went to the house of one of the known friend of her child and returned back on next day morning, when they found the deceased still on the cot. He was found dead lying on the cot. As such, the learned APP submits that there is intention to kill the deceased. No attempt was made to give help to the deceased, when he was lying injured. 7] Having considered the rival submissions, prima facie, the evidence is of the child witness, who in his statement has stated before the Magistrate that on 09.07.2024, when his mother had come home from field his father had called her darling. At that time, the mother slapped his father. Thereafter, there was quarrel between his father and mother. Thereafter the child witness stated that he has called the neighbour Shankarbhaiyya, who has resolved the dispute. Thereafter, his father left the house and came back later. When he returned back there was again quarrel between his deceased father and mother and father was beating his mother. Thereafter, she closed the door. Thereafter, again after some time she opened the door and had hit back his father with polpat on the head. His father felled on the cot. Thereafter, mother took a jute string and pulled it along the neck of his father. Thereafter the 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 4 BA2196.2024 and came back next day morning. At that time his deceased father was still lying on the cot. 8] The evidence of the child would indicate that there was quarrel followed by fight between the deceased and the applicant. The fight was on innocuous reason but there would be constant quarrels between the couple; as is seen from other statements. The deceased had beaten the applicant and, thereafter, the applicant has hit back using polpat. 9] The medical evidence indicates injuries as under: “- Lacerated wounds = 4X3X2 cm 2 cm below another lacerated of forehead = 2X3X2 cm seen on Right side of forehead and oozing of blood from top of back occipital joint injury 0-dX1 cm seen; from this blood oozing - Black coloured band = 2X2 cm seen infront of neck but not seen backside and flexible neck. -Front side below band # of cartilage as such not observed.” 10] The opinion of death is as under: “...death most probably due to cardio- respiratory arrest, due to hypovolemic shock caused by injuries. However exact cause of death will be given after the chemical analysis report of viscera. 11] From the medical evidence it appears that death 5 BA2196.2024 was due to hypovolemic shok, which largely mean internal loss of large amount of blood that has resulted in cardio respiratory arrest. The injuries as noted in clause 17 of the post- mortem report does not indicate fracture injury. Even on the neck, it is stated that there is no fracture. There is no ligature mark on back of neck and front side below band of cartilage fracture as such is not observed. 12] From the entire scene; as noted, it is obvious that there was no intention of killing. There was quarrel followed by fight and the applicant has hit the deceased husband with the polpat. 13] Spot-panchnama would indicate that when the deceased was seen lying on the iron cot, there were injuries on the forehead and that there was a black ligature mark on the neck of the deceased. 14] Considering the usage of the string and the polpat, apparently, the accused / applicant did not intend to kill the deceased but that action was a retaliatory fight. There is no grievous injury caused, no fracture sustained by deceased. When the deceased had fallen on the bed the applicant or her son possibly have not understood the gravity of the situation. They did not understand that the deceased would pass away by a hypovolemic shock or that 6 BA2196.2024 the deceased has suffered cardio respiratory arrest. The intention prima facie was to cause injury and it was in retaliation of the fight between the husband and the wife. 15] Considering this aspect of the matter and also considering that the applicant is arrested on 10.07.2024 and the applicant is in jail for about 1 year and that the applicant’s son is of 10 years to look after, it would be appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail. 16] In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms : a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0336/2024, dated 10.07.2024, registered with Chakur Police Station, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. b] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall not contact the informant, in any manner whatsoever, during the pendency of the trial. c] The applicant shall co-operate with the trial 7 BA2196.2024 Court and he shall attend each and every date, unless exempted by the trial Court. d] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution and he shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case. e] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall place on record of the trial Court the details of his Contact Number and residential address with updates in case of any change. 17] Needless to say, in case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled. 18] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present bail application. The concerned Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove. 19] The application stands disposed of. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe