- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4174/2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.414/2010 Vithal s/o Aashruba Nakhate, age 36 yrs., occu.agri., r/o Nathapur Tq. & Dist.Beed. ...Applicant.. (Org.accused) Versus The State of Maharashtra, through the Police Inspector, Pimpalner Police Station, Pimpalner Dist.Beed. ...Respondent... ..... Shri M.A. Tandale, Advocate for applicant. Shri D.R. Kale, APP for respondent. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE: 24.11.2010 PER COURT : - 2 - 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2] This is an application filed by the applicant seeking suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of Criminal Appeal No.414/2010. 3] The applicant – accused stands convicted for offence punishable u/s 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life on the allegations that the applicant had poured kerosene on his wife Anuradha on 24.8.2009 and had set her ablaze. The prosecution principally relies upon the two written dying declarations at Exhibits 21 and 33 recorded by Head Constable Jagtap and Executive Magistrate respectively. The trial Court has found written dying declarations to be consistent and has, therefore, placed implicit reliance on the two dying declarations. The prosecution also relies upon the oral dying declaration alleged to have been made to the mother of deceased Anuradha. 4] Shri M.A. Tandale, learned counsel for the applicant, has urged before us that in both the dying declarations i.e. Exhibits 21 and 33, no date has been mentioned by the scribe. It is further stated before us that there were no earlier complaints regarding ill-treatment and the reason ascribed by the prosecution for setting Anuradha ablaze is extremely trivial i.e. regarding payment of the electricity bill. It is also urged before us that it is apparent that the two dying declarations are - 3 - result of tutoring of deceased Anuradha by her relatives. It is also urged before us that the material on record indicates that Anuradha had committed suicide. The learned APP has opposed the application for bail on the ground that the prosecution has led evidence and the trial Court has accepted the two dying declarations and, therefore, no case for release of the applicant on bail is made out. 5] The trial Court has placed reliance on the two dying declarations at Exhibits 21 and 33 and has found them to be reliable. Prima facie, therefore, there is material against the present applicant to justify the conviction for an offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel for the applicant pertain to re-appreciation of evidence, which can not be done at this stage. Suffice it to state that there is sufficient material to prima facie indicate the involvement of the present applicant in the said crime. Additionally, we find that the applicant was not on bail. 6] For the reasons stated above, according to us, no case for release of the applicant on bail pending the decision of the criminal appeal is made out. The learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on two judgments, one is of Division Bench of this Court in Mohan Sadhu Kawale V/s State of Maharashtra [2004 CRI.L.J., 4167], and another of the Supreme Court in Puran Chand V/s State of Haryana [2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2625 (S.C.)]. The ratio laid down in these judgments is not applicable to the facts of the present case, particularly while - 4 - deciding the present application. We have already held that there is prima facie material against the present applicant in respect of his involvement. 7] Thus, there being no merit in the present application, the application is dismissed. (A.V. Potdar, J.) (P.V. Hardas, J.) ndk/cr2411105