1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.543 OF 2010 Gayabai W/o.Appasaheb Butte, Age-50 years, Occu-Household, R/o.Bhagur, Tq.Vaijapur, Dist.Aurangabad APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station, Virgaon, Tq.Virgaon, Dist. Aurangabad RESPONDENT Mr.M.D.Thube-Mhase, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.B.Patil, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 22/02/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for her release on bail in connection with CR No.68/2009, registered in Virgaon Police Station for the alleged offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w. 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed, but the matter is yet to be committed to the Court of Sessions. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by 2 the submissions of learned APP appearing for the State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out as investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. 3. It appears that the alleged offence came to be registered on the basis of dying declaration of one Dwarka, the victim deceased, who was admitted in Ghati Hospital on 05/08/2009 at about 11.20 a.m. by the neighbourer Pandharinath. She succumb to death on the same day evening. It is contended that even though the said offence came to be registered on 06/08/2009, after about 12 hours after the deceased succumb to death, and on her own dying declaration, wherein it is alleged that in the morning of 05/08/2009, at around 7.00 a.,m., quarrel took place between the applicant is her sister in law and quarrel took place between them on account of cooking at their residential place and at that time, the applicant poured kerosene on her person and her husband set her on fire, and hence sustained burn injuries and due to those injuries, she succumb to death. It can not be disputed that the death of Dwarka is an un- natural death. The only question as per the dying declaration is that whether the applicant to be held responsible for those burn injuries or there may be any other reason to sustain those burn injuries. 4. From perusal of the papers of investigation alongwith the charge sheet, it appears that at the time of admission of the deceased in the hospital, the history about the alleged burn injuries was given by Pandharinath who admitted Dwarka in Ghati Hospital as she 3 sustained those burn injuries due to explosion of stove at the time of cooking at her residence. In this light, panchnama of spot play very vital role as it supports/corroborates the disclosure at the time of admission of deceased in the Ghati Hospital and not supported the dying declaration. This is not the forum where to decide whether the dying declaration of the deceased is to be accepted or the disclosure statement of the person who admitted the deceased in the hospital and given the history about the burn injuries, which is recorded in the Medical papers is to be accepted, but on the face of it, the history about sustaining burn injuries by deceased is supported by the spot panchnama, it is to be accepted. 5. In the premise, case is made out to release the applicant accused on bail. It is made clear that these observations are prima facie and the learned trial court not to influence with these observations, hence order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/FEB 2010/cri.appl.543-10