AB 824/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.UPADHYAY Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the p etitioners and Mr. BS Sinha, learned PP, Assam. This is an application u/s 438 CrPC seeking pre-arrest bail on b ehalf of the petitioners, Kartik Chandra Nath, Golap Chandra Nath and Sri Dhanti Kumar Nath, in connection with Raha PS Case No. 37/11 u/s 120(B)/304(B)/201/34 IPC. Learned PP by producing the case diary apprised the Court about the progress of investigation of the case. Pursuant to the direction of this Court on 30.5.11, an enquiry w as conducted by the I/O of the case regarding the recording of the dying declara tion of the deceased in the hospital without any signature of the Doctor who rec orded the dying declaration. However, the report from the Doctors who were pres ent at the time of recording of the dying declaration and the Doctor who recorde d the dying declaration, has now been made available in the case diary. The FIR lodged on behalf of the Mahila Samity of the locality reveals that on 2.3.11 wh en Ranjan Devi expired at Guwahati Medical College, her funeral was carried out without informing her family members. When the informants Nitumoni Nath, borteh r of Ranjana Devi and Sri Junti Nath, brother in -law visited the house of the a ccused persons to know about the incident, they were chased by the accused pers ons. On perusal of the case diary, it appears that the dying declarat ion was made by the victim immediately after the occurrence in the hospital whic h was recorded by the Doctor attending her. On perusal of the dying declaration it transpires that on the date of occurrence due to accidental fall of the kero sene lamp, ’saree’ of the victim caught fire. Although her husband tried his bes t to rescue her, however, in the process he also sustained burn injuries. In th e meanwhile, 108 ’Mritunjoy’ Ambulance was summoned which took her to hospital. Mr. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner further su bmits that petitioner No.1, Kartik Chandra Nath is the borther -in-law of the vi ctim is a defence personal, posted at Kashmir, arrived after getting the informa tion of the incident. Learned counsel submitted that none of the petitioners we re present at the time of occurrence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the alle gation levelled in the FIR and considering the dying declaration of the deceased , I am of the considered view that there is no sufficient incriminating material against the petitioner warranting their custodial interrogation. In my conside red view, this is a fit case to allow the prayer of pre-arrest bail of the petit ioners. Accordingly, the petitioners aforenamed are allowed to go on bai l of Rs.10,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount each to the satis faction of the arresting authority in the event of their arrest in connection wi th the aforesaid case on condition that they shall cooperate with the investigat ion and shall appear before the I/O as and when required. Bail application stands disposed of.