{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 58 OF 2010 Shaikh Juned s/o Sk.Moti Mansuri APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.A.S.Barlota, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 5th February 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.89/2009 registered with Khultabad police station, as the applicant is arrested on 11.06.2009 and charge sheet has been filed on 06.09.2009 and even the case is committed to the Court of Sessions and numbered as Sessions Case No.394/2009. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. {2} 3. Postmortem notes disclose that death of victim Heena, wife of present applicant, caused due to 100% burn injuries and at the time of said incident the victim was carrying 3 months pregnancy. Though there are three dying declarations, yet they are consistent to the extent that the applicant was suspecting the character of the deceased and on that count he used to harass her. There are allegations that the applicant intended to re-marry, however as the deceased was alive he could not have married and hence he used to harass her. Statements of sister and brother in law of the deceased disclose that after the applicant set the deceased on fire, he bolted the door from outside so as to prevent the deceased from extinguishing the fire. In the premise, there is direct nexus between the death of the deceased, that too when she was carrying three months pregnancy, and the role played by the applicant and hence the applicant does not deserve any leniency. In the result, the application which is sans merits stands rejected. It is however clarified that these are the prima facie observations based on the record before this Court. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln58-10