1 Criminal Application No.448/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.448 OF 2011 Raisuddin s/o Mainuddin Kazi ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Mrs. S.S. Jadhav & Mr. A.M. Karad, Advocates for applicant Mr. K.S. Patil, A.P.P., for respondent, assisted by Mr. Shaikh Nasir, Advocate for original complainant ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 23rd February, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. Firdosbee was married to the accused/ applicant in June 2010 with hope of happy married life, had to face brunt on 8.10.2010, within a span of 4 months. She was in all probabilities insistive for separate abode as the accused/ applicant was a member with other family members. There are two dying declarations of the victim, one recorded immediately after 25 minutes of the event, which has been treated as F.I.R., recorded at 10.55 p.m. while the other is at 11.45 p.m., recorded in presence of the medical officer, who has certified the patient to be conscious to give statement. This was so at the commencement of statement 2 Criminal Application No.448/2011 and even at the conclusion, the statement from the notings illustrate to have taken place around 20 minutes. Though it is in a concise form, having put both the statemnets in juxtaposition, I find there is no inconsistency to the extent of the role of the accused/ applicant in setting afire his wife when she was in the matrimonial home, in control and custody of the husband. 2. The learned counsel submit that, the prelude needs to be considered. Husband has attended the work, having reached home, he did not expect his wife to goad, urge on and insisting for separate residence, the incident, in all probabilities, could be a self immolation than the accused/ applicant set afire to his wife. 3. At this stage of the matter, this Court is not required to scan the evidence to accept the contention of learned counsel in affirmative as the two dying declarations rebell the proposition. Even if charge sheet is filed, the manner in which the ghastly act is committed, gravity of offence does not warrant any leniency. Consequently, the application is rejected. Observations are prima facie. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/cri448.11