HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated Nainital the 26th August, 2008 First Bail Application No. 455 of 2008 Order on the bail application of the accused. Govind Singh and another …Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand …Opposite Party Case Crime No.2 of 2008 U/s 304 (B) and 498 (A) I.P.C. Registered on the basis of F.I.R. dtd. 29.02.2008 Patwari Circle Ghimtoli, District - Rudraprayag Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Hard Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the applicants; Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for respondent/State; and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the accused/applicants in Case Crime No.2 of 2008 u/s 304(B) & 498(A) I.P.C. registered on the basis of the F.I.R. dated 29/02/2008 at Patwari Circle Ghimtoli, Tehsil Rudraprayag, district Rudraprayag. The present accused/applicants Govind Singh and Mahendra Singh are father-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased respectively. Perused the counter affidavit filed by the respondent/State. Learend counsel for the accused/applicants contended that the accused/applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The learned counsel for the accused/applicants further contended that the dying declaration of the deceased Urmila @ Guddi was recorded on 07/02/2008 in Base Hospital, Srinagar in which she h ad not named any of the accused/applicants who had participated in the commission of the offence. The another dying declaration which was recorded on 13/02/2008 at Dehradun Hospital, the deceased had stated that kerosene oil was sprinkled on her body and set on fire by her mother-in-law Smt. Kashmira Devi. Learned counsel for the accused/applicants in the commission of the offence as alleged against them. The learned A.G.A. refuted the contention. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in totality and contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that it is a fit case for bail. Let the accused/applicants Govidn Singh and Mahendra Singh be released on bail on furnishing each personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) Dt. 26.08.2008 Shiv