IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2131/2009 ( Shankar Dagdu Patole and another .vs. State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 29 th JUNE, 2009 Heard Shri Thakkar, Advocate, for the applicant and Shri Mandpe, APP, for respondent. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant Nos. 1 & 2 are the in-laws of the deceased, whereas applicant no.3 is the sister-in-law. The incident had occurred on 5.11.2008. The dying declaration of the deceased seems to have been recorded on 5.11.2008, which shows that the in-laws of the deceased viz. Shankar Patole and Shashikala Shankar Patole were out of station as their son-in-law had expired. Therefore, the said dying declaration does not incriminate the applicants. Turning to the another dying declaration which is recorded on 7.11.2008, it is stated that the applicants were just standing at the time of incident, they did not try to extinguish the fire. The allegations are mainly against her husband. The husband has not applied for bail and he is in jail. Learned counsel for the applicants has pointed out from the medical certificate enclosed with the charge sheet issued by Dr. Wanjari, dated 7.11.2008 that the deceased was medically unfit to make statement. Therefore, according to him, this dying declaration is not reliable. However, the fact remains that both these dying declaration do not incriminate the present applicants for the offence under Section 302 and also under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. In these circumstances, each of them would be entitled for bail. However, subject to conditions. ُEach of the applicants be released on bail on furnishing surety and P..R.Bond of Rs. 15,000/- subject to conditions that they shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the trial regularly. Bail in trial Court. Hamdast granted. Application disposed of. JUDGE Rvjalit