(1) CRI.APP. 3539.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3539 OF 2010 Chandrao S/o Kerbaji Chavan .. Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr. N.N. Chitlange, Advocate for the Applicant Mrs. B.R. Khekale, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 11TH OCTOBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. This is an Application for bail. 2. The applicant is arrested in connection with crime no. 75 of 2010 registered at Akhada Balapur Police Station for offences punishable under section 498-A, 302, 323 and 504 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The applicant is father in law of deceased Smt. Mamta. The deceased was aged about 18 years at the relevant time. It appears that on 25th May, 2009 the marriage between deceased Mamta and son of the (2) CRI.APP. 3539.2010 applicant, namely, Parmeshwar was performed. She used to tell her parents about the matrimonial cruelty meted out to her at the hands of the applicant and the in-laws. On 6.8.2010 the incident occurred in the matrimonial house wherein deceased Mamta received extensive burn injuries. She subsequently died in the Government hospital at Nanded due to 93% burns. 4. The learned Advocate for the applicant would submit that mother-in-law of deceased Mamta has been released on bail by the Court of Sessions and, therefore, the applicant deserves identical treatment on basis of parity. He would submit that the applicant is not shown to have ill-treated the deceased Mamta prior to the alleged incident. He would further submit that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence and deserves liberty. 5. So far as the ground of parity is concerned, it is important to notice that the learned Sessions Judge allowed Application of the mother-in-law of the (3) CRI.APP. 3539.2010 deceased because of the fact that she is a woman. The Sessions Judge also noticed that the allegation about the role of the mother-in-law may not be acceptable in view of the attending circumstances. The protective discrimination available to the mother-in-law in view of proviso appended to section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not available to the applicant. 6. The FIR purports to show that in the relevant night husband of the deceased kicked her and, thereafter the applicant had pressed her by holding her hands whereas the mother-in-law poured kerosene on her person and the husband set fire to her person by means of a burning matchstick. The recorded dying declaration of deceased also corroborates the fact that the applicant was present in the house and had assisted her husband while setting her on fire. The Police statement of Smt. Vanitabai prima facie shows that the husband and his relatives including the applicant used to torture the deceased on suspicion about her infidelity. Her version also shows that deceased Mamta gave oral (4) CRI.APP. 3539.2010 dying declaration alleging that her in-laws had closed door of the said room and, thereafter the applicant had held both of the hands while the mother-in-law had poured kerosene on her person after the husband set her ablaze by means of a burning match-stick. Similar is statement of her father Pandurang. Thus, there are oral and written dying declarations which prima facie indicates contribution of the applicant in the commission of the alleged incident of burning the deceased Mamta, who was hardly aged about 18 years and that the marriage had been performed only a year before the incident. 7. Under these circumstances, the applicant does not deserve liberty. Application is therefore dismissed. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp