1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 132 /2010 [Panchfula w/o Bhikaji Nagare and one vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr R N Ghuge, Adv. for applicants Mr K S Dhote, APP for Respondent CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 11, 2010. Heard. 2 Learned Advocate for the applicants prays for bail in respect of Crime No. 59/2009 registered at Kingaon Raja Police Station Dist. Buldana on 15.8.2009 for offence punishable u/s 307 ( later on converted in Sections 307, 302, 304 B read with section 34 IPC). It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that applicant no.1 is a lady of advanced age, inasmuch as she is running 65 years of age; whereas the applicant no.2 is the sister- in-law of the victim. She was staying at Kingaon Raja Tq. Sindkhedaraja Dist. Buldana at the time of the incident in her matrimonial home. The victim Trivenibai in her immediate version after the alleged incident, had alleged that her husband who came in an inebriated condition from the Market on 14.8.2009 at about 6.00 p.m., had abused filthily, assaulted and thereafter took out a can containing rockel, poured on her person and set her ablaze. Thereafter,it is alleged by 2 the prosecution that victim's another dying declaration was recorded by the Special Executive Magistrate who had recorded alleged dying declaration in the question and answer form in which the victim implicated the applicants as well as her husband. However, in the same dying declaration while concluding the answers, she specifically imputed criminal liability to her husband who had set her on fire. Under these circumstances, there is prima facie doubt about involvement of this applicants. In fact some of the witnesses whose statements have been recorded in the course of investigation stated that applicant no.1 was seen extinguishing the fire. Therefore, learned Advocate for the applicants prays for grant of bail in favour of the applicants who may in all probability get the benefit of doubt. 3 Learned APP vehemently opposed grant of bail on the ground that accusations are serious. 4 Considerting the submissions advanced at the Bar as also the material collected during the investigation so far, prima facie one may believe in submissions advanced on behalf of the applicants as probability of false implication cannot be ruled out, more so when the very first version did not implicate the present applicants, of course, it would depend upon the entire evidence that may be led before the trial Court. At this stage, however, it appears that case for bail is made out subject to certain conditions which may be imposed against the applicants. Hence the following order is 3 passed: The applicants be released on bail, in connection with Crime No.59 /2009 registered at Kingaon Raja Police Station, upon executing PR bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each, with one or more sureties in the equal amount, to be provided by each of them, with further conditions that the applicants shall attend the I.O. as and when required, so also the trial on each date of hearing. They shall inform their fixed address with telephone/cell phone number, if any, to the I.O. As well as the Presiding Officer of the Court below; and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. Application stands disposed of. Humdast allowed. JUDGE sahare