1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2858 OF 2010 Rajendra S/o.Raghunath Gujar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.A.N.Kakade, learned counsel for applicant. Mrs.V.A.Shinde, learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 10/08/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.29/2010, registered in Thalner Police Station, in which the applicant came to be arrested on 22/04/2010. In the said CR, after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of J.M.F.C. Shirpur against applicant on 30/06/2010. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. Perusal of post mortem notes indicate that the autopsy was carried out on the dead body of victim Savita, in which cause of death is mentioned as death due to Cardio Respiratory Arrest failure 2 due to 100% burn injuries. Thus the fact is clear that the death of victim is homicidal death. On perusal of the FIR lodged by the complainant husband of the victim Savita by name Gulab Dhangar it reveals that the alleged incident took place on 21/04/2010, at about 12.30 noon at his residential house. The applicant herein is complaining about the character of victim Savita and on that ground, some alteration of words took place between complainant as in the morning of 21/04/2010 and on earlier occasions also, the present applicant tried to molest the victim. On the day of incident also, applicant entered in the house of complainant alongwith female members in his family, abused the wife of the complainant Savita, thereafter poured kerosene on her person and put her on fire. Thereafter immediately, the victim was taken to the hospital where within some hours, she was reported to be dead. Considering all these facts, it reveals that there is direct nexus between the act of the applicant and the death of Savita, for which there is no explanation at all on the part of the applicant. The papers of investigation are sufficient to prima facie hold that the act of the applicant is resulted in the death of Savita, for which there is punishment like life imprisonment or death. Considering these circumstances, the case of the applicant can not be termed to be treated on parity with other persons. The application is sans any merit, hence rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/AUG 2010/cri.appl.2858-10