{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4517 OF 2009 Kamlabai w/o Parasram Pole APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.P.S.Agrawal, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.B.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 7 th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for her release on bail in connection with CR No.99/2009 registered with Aundha Nagnath Police Station for an offence punishable u/s 302 and 498-A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation, carried out till today. {2} 3. It appears that the alleged incident took place on 10th November 2009 and on the basis of the statement of the victim, initially an offence u/s 307 of the IPC was to be registered. It is alleged by the victim that her husband poured kerosene on her person, present applicant i.e. her mother in law, caught hold of her and her sister in law, set her on fire. It is further alleged that the victim came outside the house in burning condition, which is witnessed by about 9 to 10 persons, whose statements came to be recorded during the investigation. It further appears that the victim succumbed to her burn injuries on 14 th November 2009. Thereafter, offence u/s 302 came to be added. Post Moretem notes indicate that the victim had sustained 99% burn injuries. Statements of the witnesses, recorded during the investigation, indicate that though the applicant, her son and her daughter were in the house, yet they have neither made any efforts to extinguish the fire nor have they taken the victim to hospital for treatment. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant came to be arrested on 19th November 2009 and since then she is in jail. It is also urged that taking into consideration the age of the applicant and in view of the fact that as now the material investigation is over, she be released on bail. 5. While opposing the application, it is urged by learned APP that still the investigation is in progress and there is direct nexus between the death of the victim and the role played by the {3} present applicant. 6. Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the PM notes, it is clear that the victim succumbed to death due to the 99% burn injuries sustained by her. In the first statement of the victim, recorded immediately after the occurrence of the incident, she has asserted the role played by the applicant that present applicant had caught hold of her and her husband had poured kerosene on her person and her sister in law had set her on fire. In the premise, while considering the rights of the accused, rights of the victim also require to be considered. In view of the fact that the investigation is still in progress, it is not safe to release the applicant on bail, at least at this stage. No case is made out to release the applicant on bail. 7. In the result, the application which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln4517-09