1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Criminal Application (BA) No. 435/2011 Sk. Gulami Sk. Babamiya Vs. State of Maharashtra =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. A.J. Thakkar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. P.D. Kothari, APP for the respondent. CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 16/08/2011. 1] This application for bail has been filed by the applicant, who has been arrested by Lonar Police on 25.12.2010 in Crime No. 198/2010 registered for offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). 2] According to the applicant, he is permanent resident of Lonar and that the investigation is completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the case has been committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Buldhana where it has been registered as Sessions trial No. 70/2011. The applicant says that his wife Faridabee received burn injuries in an accidental fire while igniting kerosene lamp 2 and she has already recovered and is presently residing with her parents at Majalgaon, District Beed. The applicant undertakes to abide by any conditions, that may be imposed by this Court and prays for releasing him on bail on the ground of parity since all co-accused have already been released. 3] By way of reply, the non-applicant has resisted the bail application on the ground that the applicant has been implicated in the crime on account of statement of the injured which was recorded as a dying declaration and further on the ground that the applicant is previous convict for having set his earlier wife on fire by pouring kerosene and he has been convicted in the said Crime. 4] Heard learned Advocate Shri A.J. Thakkar appearing for the applicant and learned A.P.P. Shri P. D. Kothari appearing for the non-applicant. 5] Perused the case papers. 6] It is seen that in the dying declaration, which has 3 now become a statement of the injured, she has directly involved her brother-in-law by name Mukhtar by stating that he poured kerosene on her person. Said Mukhtar along with other co-accused have already been released on bail. 7] It is an admitted fact that presently the injured Faridabee has recovered and is not residing in her matrimonial house and is residing with her parents. 8] There is no dispute about the fact that the investigation is already completed and after filing of charge-sheet the case has been committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Buldana and is pending for framing of charge. 9] I do not see any reason as to why the applicant should remain in custody now when other co-accused are on bail. Certain conditions can be put on the applicant for taking care of fear, which is in the mind of learned A.P.P. 10] In the result:- 4 [a] The application is allowed. [b] The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime no. 198/2010 registered for offence punishable under Section 498-A and 307 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. (Sessions Trial No. 70/2011) upon execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount under the following conditions:- [i] The applicant shall not enter the village Majalgaon where the injured is residing and he shall not make any attempt to contact his wife during pendency of the Sessions Trial; [ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence in Sessions case; [iii] He shall not leave India without previous permission of the Trial Court; and [iv] Bail bonds to be furnished before the Sessions Court. [v] Hamdast allowed. JUDGE Ambulikar.