1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 843 OF 2010 1 Prabhakar Dagu Sonawane, age 57 years, occ. service, 2 Sukhadeo Dagu Sonawane, age 56 years, occ. agril., 3 Rohini Ashis Mali, age 20 years, Undirwadi, Tq. Yeola, Dist. Nasik ...Applicants VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents ..... Smt. S.S.Jadhav, advocate for the applicants Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondents Shri V.D.Sapkal, advocate for Ashish Sitaram Mail, son of deceased Sitaram, as per order passed by this court in Criminal Application No. 969 of 2010 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 8th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Smt. S.S.Jadhav, advocate for the applicants, Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondents and Shri V.D.Sapkal, advocate for Ashish Sitaram Mail, son of deceased Sitaram, as per order passed by this court in Criminal Application No. 969 of 2010. 2 2 This an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 to 3 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under CR No. 59 of 2010, registered at Kopargaon police station for the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 At the out set, Smt. Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicants submits, on instructions, that applicant no.1 Prabhakar Dagu Sonawane does not wish to prosecute the present application further more and requested to withdraw the same. Hence, in view of the said submission, application of said applicant no.1 Prabhakar stands dismissed as withdrawn. However, Smt. Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant nos. 2 and 3 intend to prosecute the present application further. 4 It appears that the offence has been registered on the dying declaration of victim namely Sitaram Mahadu Mali on 14.2.2010. Applicant no.1 and applicant no2. are brothers of each other; whereas applicant no.3 Rohini is daughter of applicant no.1, whose marriage took place on 26.5.2009 with Ashish Sitaram Mali i.e. son of the victim namely Sitaram. There was matrimonial discord between applicant no.3 Rohini and Ashish within short time after their marriage. Applicant no.3 Rohini is prosecuting her studies in T.Y.B.A. in S.S.G.M. College, Kopargaon. The alleged incident occurred on 13.2.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. and the dying declaration of the said victim Sitaram recorded on 3 13.2.2010 discloses that applicant nos. 1 to 3 visited his house at that time and demanded the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- i.e. expenditure incurred by them in the marriage of Rohini and Ashish and threatened him that if the said amount is not returned by victim Sitaram, he would face the consequences. It is also disclosed in the said dying declaration that thereafter the applicants herein who had brought a plastic bottle containing petrol, poured the same on the person of Sitaram and set him albaze. Thereupon he shouted, and therefore, his wife came out and she also shouted and poured water on his person and extinguished the fire. 5 Learned A.P.P. pointed out that another dying declaration of victim Sitaram was recorded on 14.2.2010, which narrates almost the similar story, but attributed specific role to applicant no.1 Prabhakar that he possessed the bottle containing petrol and he poured the petrol therefrom on the person of victim Sitaram and set him ablaze by match stick. 6 Apparently, considering both the said dying declarations, dated 13.2.2010 and 14.2.2010, it appears that there are omnibus allegations against applicant nos. 1 to 3 in the dying declaration recorded on 13.2.2010 and no specific role has been attributed to each of the applicants; whereas in dying declaration recorded subsequently on 14.2.2010, specific role was attributed to applicant no.1 Prabhakar as afore said and apparently no specific role was attributed to 4 applicant nos. 2 and 3 therein during the occurrence of the incident. 7 Considering the said position, I am of the view that present application, in respect of applicant nos. 2 and 3, deserves to be allowed. 8 Besides that, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no.3 Rohini is the student of T.Y.B.A. and the certificate to that effect is annexed at Exh. 'B' (page 10). It is also canvassed that her examination would commence in this month i.e. April, 2010 and she should not be deprived of the said examination as her matrimonial life has almost been ruined. 9 Having the comprehensive view of the matter, present application deserves to be allowed in respect of applicant nos. 2 and 3 and interim protection granted to the said applicants by order dated 4.3.2010 stands confirmed. 10 It is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of applicant no.2-Sukhadeo Dagu Sonawane and applicant no.3-Rohini Ashish Mali, in connection with CR No. 59 of 2010, registered with Kopargaon police station, they be released on bail on furnishing their sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing P.R. bond by each of them, on the following terms and conditions. 5 (i) Applicant nos. 2 and 3 shall attend the concerned police station as and when required and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) Applicant nos. 2 and 3 shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the witnesses directly or indirectly. 11 Needles to state that the afore said order shall be in force till filing of the charge sheet. 12 Application of applicant no.1 Prabhakar stands dismissed as withdrawn. 13 The above observations are prima facie and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap843.10