1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1655 OF 2009 1] Shabana w/o Lalu Shaikh age : 32 years, Occu.: household, r/o Limbe Jalgaon, Tq. Gangapur, District : Aurangabad 2] Sk. Riyaz Sk. Shabbir, Age : 22 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o As above 3] Lalu S/o Babulal Shaikh, Age : 38 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o As above 4] Shamina w/o Ayyaz Shaikh, Age : 28 years, Occu.: Household, R/o As above .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra, Copy to be served on the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad .. Respondent Mr. N.S. Ghanekar, Advocate for the applicants Mr. N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent-State CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 11th JUNE, 2009 ORAL ORDER:- 1] The applicants are seeking bail in crime 2 no. 7 of 2009 registered by Waluj Police Station, Aurangabad alleging offences under section 302, 341, 447, 509 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants and one more accused are accused of committing murder of one Chandrakala w/o Balu on 10.1.2009 at about 6:00 pm. The prosecution case, is as under:- 2] Deceased Chandrakala and her family members were residing at village Limbe Jalgaon. They had a vacant plot of land adjoining their house. Recently, owner of this plot sold it to the applicants. The applicants therefore, started claiming ownership and possession of this plot of land. On 10.1.2009, in the morning, deceased Chandrakala was present in her house whereas, her husband and son had gone out for work. At that time the applicants went to the house of Chandrakala and abused her. They had grievance that Chandrakala and her family members were unauthorisedly using their plot of land for having egress and ingress to their house. Chandrakala then left her house and joined her husband at about 10.00 am. and she narrated this 3 incident to her husband. Her husband passified her, saying that he would look into her complaint subsequently. During the entire day Chandrakala and her husband were busy in their work. At about 06:00 pm. her husband left her to have a cup of tea in a restaurant, whereas Chandrakala walked alongwith her cattle to her house. She found that her ingress to her house was being blocked by laying thorny bushes. It was obviously the applicants who had done so to prevent the entry to the property. Chandrakala, however removed the obstacle and entered her house. While she was tying the cattle, the applicants allegedly came towards her and they started quarreling with her. Suddenly they became violent and applicant Shabana brought can of kerosene and poured it on her person. Someone amongst the applicants then set her on fire. While this was going on, Chandrakala raised alarm. Hearing her cries, her husband Balu who was walking towards the house rushed there and saw the present applicants leaving his house and his wife Chandrakala in injured condition. He immediately poured water on her person to extinguish the fire. He immediately 4 called his son Ganesh aged 22 years to rush to the house. He informed Ganesh that applicants had set his mother on fire. Ganesh also rushed to the spot and saw his mother in injured condition. He asked his mother as to what had happened and Chandrakala told him that it was the applicants who set her on fire. Chandrakala was rushed to the hospital and her statement was recorded which became the FIR of the case. After some time, Naib Tahsildar arrived at the hospital, who also tried to record Chandrakala’s statement. Though, the recording of the statement by the Naib Tahsildar is not happily worded but it essentially mentions that it was the applicants who set Chandrakala on fire. The statements of Balu and Ganesh were recorded, a gist of which is mentioned above. This is in gist the material against the applicants. 3] Mr. Ghanekar appearing for the applicants pointed out that one kerosene vendor Shri Santosh stated to the Police that Balu had purchased 5 litres kerosene from him on or about 26.12.2008. He suggested that probably the kerosene purchased at 5 that time was used in the incident. He thereby suggested that it was most probably a case of suicide. He also suggested that due to the quarrel there was possibility of Chandrakala getting excited and in such excitement she must have set herself on fire. I am not inclined to accept the guess expressed by Shri Ghanekar. At this stage what is shown on record, must be taken at it’s face value. The material against the applicants cannot be discarded as untrustworthy etc. 4] Despite of the material against the applicants, I am inclined to release the applicant no.4 Shamina on bail. Besides her presence at the time of incidence, there is nothing against her specifically. No overt act is attributed to her. Besides she is a woman, I am told having a three months old baby. I am inclined to use discretion to release her on bail. 5] The application is partly allowed. Applicant no.4 Shamina shall be released on bail of 6 Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with one surety in the like amount. 6] Learned Sessions Judge, Aurangabad is directed to expeditiously try and dispose of the Sessions case, as far as possible within next six months. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp/11june9/cr1655.09