{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 35 OF 2010 Laxman s/o Bapu Wanve Age-57 years, Occ-Agri R/o Vetalwadi, Tq-Ashti, Dist-Beed APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.K.D.Bade Patil, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 13th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.132/2009 registered with Ashti police station, Dist-Beed for an offence punishable u/s 498-A, 302, 304-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as the applicant is arrested on 30.08.2009 and since then he is in jail and as after completion of investigation charge sheet is filed on 21.11.2009. {2} 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the basis of statement of victim Taramati recorded by the police. It is stated by the victim that the incident occurred on 30.08.2009 at about 10.00 a.m. There are sweeping allegations against the present applicant and mother in law of the victim that when a quarrel took place between the victim and her husband, the present applicant and her mother in law instigated her husband to set the victim on fire. It appears that during the said incident, the victim had sustained 84% burn injuries and succumbed to death on the same day. It further appears that another dying declaration of the victim was recorded in the evening of the same day. There is disclosure as to how the victim had sustained the burn injuries. It is urged by learned counsel for the applicant that considering the fact disclosed during the investigation and disclosure by the victim in her statement, there are sweeping allegations against the present applicant. It is also urged that in view of the fact that the investigation is already over and there are no chances of tampering of evidence, he be released on bail. 4. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that there is direct nexus between the cause of death and the role alleged against the applicant. {3} 5. Considering the rival submissions, it is clear that there is little variance in two statements of the victim. However, this is not a stage or forum to decide as to which version of the victim is correct. But the fact remains that there are sweeping allegations against the present applicant. It is alleged that the said incident does not occur on account of harassment of dowry but it was due to dispute between husband of the deceased and herself. In the premise, considering these facts and also in view of the fact that investigation is already over, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. 6. In the result, application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant is directed not to leave the local jurisdiction of the concerned police station, without prior permission, in writing, from the concerned IO or concerned criminal court. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln35-10