1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 520 OF 2010 Balaji Shivaji Suryawanshi ...Applicant VERSUS State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondent ..... Shri R.B.Deshmukh, advocate for the applicant Shri K.S.Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 18th March, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri R.B.Deshmkh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.S.Patil, learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant requesting to enlarge him on bail in connection with CR No. 8 of 2009, registered at Udgir (Rural) police station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, since he has been arrested thereunder on 13.1.2009. 2 3 The first information report has been lodged on 13.1.2009 on the dying declaration of victim namely Jaimala, wherein she has alleged that she was subjected to cruelty, illtreatment and harassment at the hands of the applicant i.e. husband and her parents-in-law on account of unlawful demand of Rs.50,000/- which was to be brought from her parents and which was not paid, and therefore, the applicant sprinkled kerosene on her person and set her ablaze on the fateful night intervening between 11/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 at about 5.00/ 5.30 a.m. 4 Admittedly, the marriage of the applicant and the victim Jaimala was solemnised on 20.3.2008. It appears from the record that the deceased Jaimala gave a written dying declaration which was recorded by police constable on 13.1.2009. Moreover, learned APP also poionted out that the deceased Jaimala has made two oral dying declarations before her mother as well as father and said written dying declaration as well as two oral dying declarations apparently connect the accused/applicant with the crime. 5 Learned APP also pointed out that shirt of the applicant was seized during the occurrence of investigation and traces of kerosene were found thereon. 6 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, and therefore, there is no propriety in keeping the applicant in custody 3 further more. Learned counsel for the applicant also urged that he may reside elsewhere, if released on bail, to meet the apprehension posed by the prosecution that he would pressurise the witnesses, and according to the learned counsel for the applicant, there is no other evidence except the alleged dying declarations given by the victim. 7 On perusal of the investigation papers and after considering the rival contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, apparently the written dying declaration given by victim Jaimala connects the applicant with the crime. The said dying declaration reflects that the victim Jaimala was pregnant for three months and the said aspect apparently aggravates the offence. Moreover, the sight cannot be lost of the aspect that the deceased has made two oral dying declarations i.e. before her mother and father, which also apparently connect the accused with the crime. Besides that, the shirt of the applicant was seized, which also disclosed traces of kerosene. Moreover, since the marriage of the applicant and deceased Jaimala took place recently on 20.3.2008, the provisions of Section 113-A of the Evidence Act would apparently be invoked. Apart from that, the deceased sustained 98 per cent burns and succumbed to the said injuries, which itself indicates that the offence is serious. 8 Although investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, the prosecution has posed the apprehension that the applicant would influence upon the witnesses and tamper with the 4 evidence, since the witnesses belong to the said village, and simply staying away from the said village by the applicant, as suggested by the learned counsel for the applicant, would not meet the said apprehension. In the circumstances, present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and same deserves to be dismissed. 9 In the result, present Criminal Application No. 520 of 2010 being sans merit stands dismissed. 10 The above observations are prima facie and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/cr520.10