( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATIN NO.350 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATIN NO.350 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATIN NO.350 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.177 OF 2005. Vishram Kama Vanel .. Applicant v/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.A.H.Solkar for the Applicant. Ms.P.H.Kantharia, APP for the State. CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI & CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI & CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. R.G.KETKAR, JJ. R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 5TH MAY, 2009. DATE : 5TH MAY, 2009. DATE : 5TH MAY, 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Applicant is convicted for offnces u/s.302, 451, 323, r/w section 34 of IPC. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant’s wife poured kerosene on the applicant’s brother’s wife and the applicant set her on fire with the burning stove. Applicant’s brother’s wife thus received burn injuries and she died. Bail application filed by the applicant has been rejected by this Court. This is his second application for bail. 2. Brother of the applicant and his nephew (brother’s son) have filed affidavit cum declaration indicating that they have settled all their disputes with the applicant. Curiously in paragraph 3 of the affidavit it is stated that when the deceased, wife of the brother of the applicant was cooking food her clothes caught fire because of the bursting of stove. Due to bursting of stove she received burn injuries and later on she died. ( 2 ) This story is contrary to the prosecution case. 3. It is not possible to accept this story. May be the parties have now settled their property disputes. That does not mean that on that basis the applicant can be released on bail on a new version which prima facie appears to be a got up version. Prima-facie it appears to us that the applicant has tried to win over his brother so that he gets an order of bail. Such prayers cannot be entertained. The deceased has made dying declarations in which she has implicated the applicant. The Special Executive Magistrate who recorded the dying declaration has been examined. Hence prayer for bail cannot be entertained. Application is dismissed. 4. Liberty to the applicant to move this Court for fixing date of hearing of the appeal. (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.) (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.) (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.)