1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1588 OF 2010 Kisanbai w/o Badsha Wakchaure & anr. ...Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri S.K. Shinde, Advocate for the applicants Shri K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th May, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. S.K. Shinde, learned counsel for the applicants as well as heard Mr. K.S. Patil, learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant Nos.1 and 2, seeking bail in connection with C.R. No.I-23/2010, registered at Akole Taluka Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, since the applicant No.1 was arrested thereunder on 20.3.2010 and applicant No.2 was arrested thereunder on 25.3.2010 respectively. 2 3. It appears that, the offence has been registered on 19.3.2010, on the basis of dying declaration of the victim namely Rekha, recorded in presence of Judicial Magistrate, Court I, Akole on 17.3.2010. Initially, the said offence was registered under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. However, thereafter since the victim Rekha expired due to the burns on 21.3.2010, the offence was converted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant No.1 is mother-in-law of the victim Rekha whereas the applicant No.2 is husband of victim Rekha. 4. On perusal of the contents of aforesaid dying declaration dated 17.3.2010 of victim Rekha, it is seen that, she has categorically named the applicant No.1 i.e. her mother-in-law as the perpetrator of the crime, and she has specifically stated therein that at the time of occurrence of the incident, victim and applicant No.1 only were present in the house, and the applicant No.1 quarreled with the victim and she poured kerosene on the person of the victim and set her ablaze by lighting a match stick. It is a matter of record that, victim Rekha sustained 99% burns and as per post mortem notes, and the cause of death is due to septicemic shock due to superficial to deep burns 99%. Hence, the involvement of applicant No.1 in the alleged crime is 3 apparent. Moreover, the offence is of serious nature and investigation is still under progress and same has not been completed and, therefore, the applicant No.1 is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. However, simultaneously, it is apparent that the name of the applicant No.2 i.e. husband of victim Rekha has neither been reflected in the contents of F.I.R. nor any role has been attributed to him in the occurrence of the incident. Moreover, there is no whisper in the dying declaration that the applicant No.2 i.e. husband of victim Rekha was present in the house at the time of incident. The only circumstance alleged against the applicant No.2 in the statements of witnesses that when victim Rekha was taken to the Civil Hospital Nasik from Mathurabai Hospital, Sangamner, he did not accompany with her, and not beyond that. Moreover, the applicant No.2 is in judicial custody since last more than one month, and considering the aforesaid aspects, there is no propriety in keeping the applicant No.2 in custody further more and his application for grant of bail deserves to be allowed. 6. In the result, present application is allowed partly to the extent of applicant No.2 namely Dashrath s/o Badsha Wakchaure and it is directed that the said applicant No.2 Dashrath s/o Badsha Wakchaure be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.I-23/2010, registered at Akole Taluka Police Station, on 4 furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on execution of P.R. bond in the like amount, on the following conditions: (i) The said applicant No.2 Dashrath s/o Badsha Wakchaure shall attend the concerned police station as and when required, on written intimation, till filing of the charge sheet, and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) The said applicant No.2 Dashrath s/o Badsha Wakchaure shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly/ indirectly. 7. However, the present application in respect of applicant No.1 Kisanbai w/o Badsha Wakchaure stands dismissed. 8. Needless to say that, the above observations are prima facie in nature and shall not come in way of any Court while deciding the matter on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE fmp/cri158810