SKT 1 24.appln.1905.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1905 OF 2010 Smt.Jamila Makbul Shaikh .. Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ..... Mr.R.D.Suryawanshi h/f. Mr.Waseem I. Shaikh for Applicant. Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa, APP for the for Respondents. ..... CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J DATED : JULY 8th, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions at length of the application for regular bail preferred by the applicant for release on bail during the pendency of the trial for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. On 26th May 2009, a married women was set on fire at her matrimonial house. Her husband,co- SKT 2 24.appln.1905.10.sxw accused poured kerosene on her person. Present applicant mother-in-law caught hold the hands of the victim and thus facilitated the action of setting the victim on fire. There are two dying declarations filed on record on the same day of the incident in close proximity of time. One is recorded by the Police at Hospital at Kalyan about 6.00 p.m. wherein the specific roles are assigned to husband and mother-in-law as respectively pouring kerosene and setting the victim on fire and holding her hands. Thereafter, another dying declaration was recorded by Special Executive Magistrate. It is rather cryptic in nature and there are allegations in the said second dying declaration that the present applicant and other co-accused have set her on fire. In the said second dying declaration in column No.8, there is only mention that her husband set her on fire and he himself brought her to hospital. During the arguments advanced by the advocate for the applicant he placed much emphasis on cryptic nature of the SKT 3 24.appln.1905.10.sxw second dying declaration and it is submitted that the specific role is not assigned to the present applicant and this fact may weigh for release the applicant on the bail during the pendency of the trial and the applicant being a women aged about 48 years and she has to maintain and assist the another son, who is apparently a handicapped person. 3. Admittedly, prima facie there are two dying declarations. One is giving the details indicating the role played by the applicant while setting the victim on fire and other one is rather cryptic. No doubt it cannot be considered as the circumstance in favour of the applicant so as to release her on bail. Needless to mention that the genuineness of both the dying declarations is required to be tested during the trial. At this stage, it is sufficient material not to release the applicant on bail but the trial of the matter can be expedited. Hence order. SKT 4 24.appln.1905.10.sxw O R D E R Criminal Application No. 1905 of 2010 stands rejected. The concerned additional Sessions Court which is seized of the matter shall deal with the same as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of none months from receipt of this order. While dealing with the case, on its merits, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by observations made in the present order so far as the merits of the case are concerned. (A.R.JOSHI,J.)