(1) Criminal Application No. 3148 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3148 of 2011 Rashida w/o. Shamshu Khan, Age : 60 years, Occupation : Household & Agri., R/o. Kadethan, Taluka : Paithan, .. Applicant District : Aurangabad. (Original accused) versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Pachod, Pachod Police Station, Pachod, Taluka : Paithan, District : Aurangabad. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. U.S. Patil, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. B.V. Wagh, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent nos.1 and 2. ........................ (2) Criminal Application No. 3148 of 2011 CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 14TH SEPTEMBER 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose, as well as, heard learned respective Counsel for the parties, finally. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No. I-110/2011, registered at Police Station, Pachod (District : Aurangabad), for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. At the outset, the applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court by order dated 28th July 2011, and the same is effective till today. 4. It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by victim Farjana w/o. Aslam Khan, on 30th June 2011, alleging that the applicant herein, who is mother-in-law of the victim Farjana, poured kerosene from the can on her person and her husband set her on fire, and both of (3) Criminal Application No. 3148 of 2011 them attempted to kill her on 26-6-2011. Admittedly, although the alleged incident occurred on 26th June 2011, the FIR came to be lodged after delay of four days i.e. on 30th June 2011, and no satisfactory explanation has been given for the said delay. Moreover, on perusal of the injury certificate, it appears that the victim sustained 27 % burns. It is also pointed out by the learned Counsel for the applicant, that the co-accused i.e. husband of the victim, namely, Aslam Khan, has been granted bail by the learned Sessions Court. 5. Besides, it is seen from the investigation papers, that the Medical Officer sent a communication to the concerned Police Inspector of Pachod Police Station, on 26th June 2011, under M.L.C. No. 518/2011, informing that the victim sustained burns due to fall of lamp on her person and the said M.L.C. has been recorded at the first point in time, and apparently, creates suspicion in respect of the theory advanced by the complainant in her complaint. 6. Considering the accusations made against the applicant, and the nature and gravity thereof, and in view of the aforesaid discussion, possibility of false implication of the applicant in the alleged crime cannot be ruled out, and therefore, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant deserves to be (4) Criminal Application No. 3148 of 2011 made absolute. 7. In the result, present Criminal Application is allowed, and interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant on 28th July 2011, stands confirmed, on the conditions that (i) applicant shall give attendance before the concerned investigator once in a week on every Friday between 3.00 p.m. to 05.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet, and shall cooperate in the investigation, and (ii) applicant shall not influence upon witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, and present Application stands disposed of finally. 8. However, it is made clear that the above observations are prima facie in nature, and same 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 ......................... bgp/ka3148