1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1170 /2010 ((1) Baban Kashiram Shipe and another vs. State of Maharashtra) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. Ramesh Darda, Adv.for applicants Mrs. A R Taiwade, APP for Respondent CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 25 th August, 2010. Heard learned counsel for respective parties. 2. By means of the present application, the applicants prays for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 14/2010 for offence punishable under sections 307, 302, 304(B), 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code reported at Kingaon Raja Police Station, Dist. Buldana. 3. Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted with reference to alleged dying declaration reproduced in para 6 of the Application, that no active role has been attributed to both the applicants. On the contrary, the act attributed to father-in-law by the deceased is that he had extinguished the fire while she had received burn injuries; whereas as against brother-in- law, the deceased stated that he was present but no active role in the crime has been attributed to him as well. According to learned Advocate for applicants, the case accused against whom active role has been 2 attributed, are cooling their heels in jail and have not applied for bail. Under these circumstances he prayed for grant of bail. 4. This application was filed on 27th d July 2010; but no reply has been filed by the Respondent-State, so far. However, learned APP was heard. She contended that presence of the applicants was stated by the deceased in her dying declaration. Be that as it may; mere presence of the applicants at the time of occurrence may not be enough so as to involve them in such serious accusations. Learned APP could not lay her hands on any other material so as to deny them benefit of bail. Hence the following order :- The applicants be released on bail in respect of Crime No. 14/2010, upon executing PR bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/-each, with two or more sureties in the equal amount; provided further that applicants shall attend the trial on each date of hearing. They shall inform their permanent address with Mobile/landline number, if any, to the Trial Court. They shall not tamper with prosecution evidence and shall not misuse their liberty in any manner. Application is disposed of. JUDGE Sahare