12crn1042-10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1042 OF 2010 Mrs.Gauri Maikulal Kanojia. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. .... Ms.Sudha Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs.A.S. Pai, A.P.P. for the State. .... CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : 25TH JUNE, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions for sometime on this application for regular bail preferred on behalf of the applicant one Smt. Gauri Maikulal Kanojia for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Allegations against the present applicant are that she in association with her husband, poured kerosene over the person of the victim, her sister-in-law i.e. wife of brother of the present applicant. The victim was set on fire at broad day light in the house. In the said house victim, her husband, 12crn1042-10 2 present applicant and her husband who is also co-accused and their children were staying jointly. During the incident, husband of the victim was not at home. Allegedly present applicant and her husband were at home and they did the act of setting the victim on fire on the alleged suspicion that victim had robbed some money from the house. 3. There are two dying declarations recorded in close proximity on 25th December, 2008. Apparently both the dying declarations have endorsement of the medical doctors as to fitness and orientation of the victim. Apparently, there is nothing to suspect the veracity of the said dying declarations on the face of the said documents. In both the dying declarations the names of the present applicant and her husband are specifically mentioned giving the specific role as to pouring kerosene and setting the victim on fire. Mainly on this count itself, it must be said that there is prima facie strong material against the present applicant and also infact against the co-accused who is not applicant here. 4. During the arguments, learned Advocate Ms.Sharma 12crn1042-10 3 strongly submitted that the applicant and her husband are in jail since the date of their arrest and as such their small children are not being looked after by anybody and infact one child daughter aged 1 & 1/2 years is presently staying with the applicant in the jail as there is nobody to look after such tender age child at home. It is further submitted that the child is now keeping illhealth and as such even on this ground bail application may be allowed. 5. Considering the prima facie material available and considering that the chargesheet is already filed and even the matter is fixed for recording of the evidence before the Fast Track Court at District - Thane i.e. charge is already framed, it would not be in the fitness of the situation to allow the present application. Hence the order :- :: O R D E R :: [i] Criminal Application No.1042 of 2010 for regular bail stands rejected. (A.R.JOSHI,J.)