( 1 ) cra4846.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4846 OF 2010 1. Lotan Ankush Borse (Patil) .. Applicants Age. 56 years, Occ. Nil 2. Saw. Primilabai w/o Lotan Borse (Patil) Age. 52 years, Occ. Household, Both r/o. Kalambu, Tq. Shahada, Dist. Nandurbar. Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. A.B. Kale, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent. CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR,J. DATED : 08.12.2010 P.C. :- 1. By this application, the applicants are seeking bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. They are in-laws of deceased Pratibha. The alleged incident had occurred in the evening of 5th October, 2010 inside the residential house of the applicants. There is no dispute about the fact that deceased Pratibha married the son of the applicant Nos. 1 & 2 on 17th April, 2009. The death of Pratibha occurred within a ( 2 ) cra4846.10 short span after the marriage. She was having an infant female child at the relevant time. 2. There is no dispute about the fact that in the relevant evening she was found in burning condition, engulfed by flames of fire around her and died due to 90% burns. Her husband extinguished the fire. He took her to the hospital. She was allegedly found crying after the incident that the applicants had burnt her away, due to the incident of earlier quarrel which had occurred in the relevant evening. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the applicants, learned A.P.P. and on going through the relevant investigation papers, it prima facie appears that the deceased Pratibha gave dying declaration to the effect that the burning oil lamp had fallen on her person and therefore she sustained the burn injuries due to the accident. She later-on changed her version and implicated the applicants while narrating the incident to the police. There are two dying declarations recorded afterwards, in which she named the applicants as authors of the burn injuries. ( 3 ) cra4846.10 4. The presence of her husband Dinesh Borse is natural and his statement was recorded by the police during course of the investigation. He was injured by extinguishing the fire. He sustained certain burn injuries during the course of the incident. His police statement prima facie shows that deceased Pratibha was a hot tempered woman. The investigation papers would show that there were no unlawful demands or any other serious complaints made by deceased Pratibha against the applicants. She was not subjected to matrimonial cruelty on prior occasion. The cause of alleged incident is stated by her, in the course of her dying declaration recorded on second occasion, is that she had asked the sister-in-law to go away from swing while she was engaged in pulling the swing at about 5-6 p.m. The sister-in-law went to in-laws. She was weeping and made complaint against deceased Pratibha to the parents. The reason shown in the dying declaration is rather trivial which ordinarily could not have triggered such an annoyance to pulling away the deceased in the backyard and in the kitchen room and to set her on fire, after about 3-4 hours of the so called complaint of the sister-in-law. As stated earlier, deceased Pratibha was rather hot tempered woman. ( 4 ) cra4846.10 5. Learned A.P.P. points out that the neighours gathered soon after the incident and hearing the cries of Pratibha while she was naming the applicants as the authors of the burn injuries. It appears that she made oral declaration while raising an alarm and named the applicants. It is quite probable that she was infuriated due to earlier quarrel with sister-in-law. It prima facie appears that her husband did not favour her in order to scold the sister-in- law and as such she was annoyed. The probability that she committed self-immolation and named the applicants as the authors of the burn injuries in order to avenge upon them cannot be ruled out, in view of her hot tempered nature and the attending circumstances. At the same time, the probability of prosecution story being truth-bearing also cannot be ruled out at this juncture. 6. In the fact situation of the present case, it would be appropriate to grant liberty to the applicants on stringent conditions. Hence, the application is allowed. The applicants are directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees ( 5 ) cra4846.10 Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with solvent surety bond in the like sum to the satisfaction of Court of Sessions, on further condition that they shall not enter the limits of Shahada Taluka during pendency of the Sessions case, except and save on the dates of hearing of the Sessions Case and shall not contact any of the prosecution witnesses and shall make no attempt to tamper with the evidence of the prosecution. They shall furnish an undertaking to such an effect along with bail bonds before the Sessions Court. [V.R. KINGAONKAR,J.] snk/2010/DEC10/cra4846.10