1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3140 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 425 OF 2009 Hameed S/o Maheboobsaab Qureshi and another ... Applicants V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ... Smt. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for applicants Mr.K.G.Patil, A.P.P. for respondent. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.NIRGUDE,JJ Date : 5th NOVEMBER,2009. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed at the behest of applicants, who stands convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhar, by judgment dated 05th August,2009, in Sessions Case No. 05 of 2009. The allegation against the appellants is that, the appellant No.2 had caught the deceased namely, Rabbana, wife of the appellant No.1 and thereafter the appellant No.1 2 had poured kerosene and had set her ablazed. The injured Rabbana is alleged to have been sustained 84% burn injuries and ultimately succumbed to her injuries. 2. The entire prosecution case against the applicants/appellants rests on two dying declarations at Exhs. 21 and 38 recorded by the Police during the course of investigation and by the Executive Magistrate respectively. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the aforesaid dying declarations at Exhs. 21 and 38. Prima facie we notice that there is element of consistency in the said dying declarations. In that light of the matter, there is prima facie evidence justifying the conviction of the appellants. We are not inclined to entertain the application at the behest of applicant/appellant No.1. i.e. Hameed Maheboob sab Qureshi. In respect of applicant- appellant No.2, it is stated before us that the applicant-appellant No.2 was on bail during trial and there are no allegations that she had 3 misused the liberty granted to her. Of course, this can not be the sole circumstance justifying to release the applicant No.2 on bail. However, on perusal of dying declaration, we find overt act ascribed to applicant No.2 is of catching deceased. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, therefore, looking to the age of the applicant, we are inclined to entertain this application as far as it relates to applicant No.2. 3. Accordingly, this application is partly allowed. The application stands dismissed in respect of applicant No.1 Hameed S/o Maheboobsab Qureshi. The application is allowed in so far as applicant No.2 Gauisyabegum W/o Maheboob Qureshi is concerned. Accordingly, substantive sentence of life imprisonment stands suspended during the pendancy of the appeal. The applicant No.2 Gauisyabegum W/o Maheboob Qureshi be released on bail, on applicant No.2 furnishing P.R.bond of sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) and surety in the like amount to the 4 satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant No.2 shall report to Osmannagar Police Station Ta. Kandhar, District Nanded, once in three month on first Saturday between 8.00 a.m. To 10.00 a.m. The application is partly allowed as indicated above. ( A.V.NIRGUDE, J) ( P.V.HARDAS,J) MTK./cri.3140.09