LATABAI DIGAMBARRAO JADHAV AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026:BHC-AUG:38751




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     925 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2287 OF 2025

                          LATABAI DIGAMBARRAO JADHAV AND OTHERS
                                              VERSUS
                                   THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                                 ...
           Mr. Anshuman B. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicants
           Ms. P. J. Bharad, APP for the Respondent/State

                                                      CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                                      DATED    : 28th AUGUST, 2026

           PER COURT :-


           1.    Applicant seeks pre arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 292 of
           2025, registered with Begumpura Police Station, District Chhatrapati
           Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 115(2), 352
           r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

           2.    The First Information Report is lodged by the mother of the deceased,
           claiming that the deceased was married to Vilas on 10.05.2007. The present
           applicants are the in-laws of the deceased. There is an allegation against them
           that they were demanding Rs.10 lakhs for construction of an upper floor of
           the house. There is also an allegation against the husband that, in the said
           state, on 08.12.2025, he assaulted the deceased. The deceased committed
           suicide at around 5.15 p.m. on the same day.

           3.    Learned Advocate for the applicants submits that, though the applicants
           are the in-laws of the deceased, they were not sharing the household with the
           deceased. It is his contention that the applicants and the deceased were
           residing separately. According to him, there is no substance in the allegation



           925 ABA 2287.2025.odt                                                     1 of 2
with regard to the demand of Rs.10 lakhs for construction of the upper floor,
as the said upper floor had already been constructed seven to eight years ago.
He, therefore, seeks confirmation of the interim order.

4.    Learned APP opposed confirmation of the interim relief by referring to
the allegations against the applicants in the First Information Report, which,
according to her, are supported by the statements of witnesses, who are close
relatives of the deceased.

5.    Prima facie, perusal of the record indicates that the applicants and the
deceased were not sharing the same household and were residing separately.
The marriage was solemnized in the year 2007 and, as such, there is no
presumption that the deceased committed suicide on account of harassment
being caused to her in connection with a demand for dowry. This Court also
finds substance in the contention of the learned Advocate for the applicants
that it is questionable as to whether there could have been any demand of
Rs.10 lakhs for construction of the upper floor, when the said floor had
already been constructed seven to eight years ago. Having regard to these
facts, this Court finds no impediment in confirming the interim relief. Hence,
the application is allowed in terms of the interim order dated 24.12.2025.



                                                      ( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
ssp




925 ABA 2287.2025.odt                                                      2 of 2