1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.782 OF 2010. IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.83 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.48 OF 2010. 1. Amrut s/o Manikrao Bedre, age 32 years, occu. agril., 2. Manikrao s/o Dadarao Bedre, age 70 years, occu. agri. 3. Bhagirathibai w/o Manikrao Bedre, age 60 years, occu. household, 4. Bhimrao s/o Manikrao Bedre, age 25 years, occu. agri., All r/o Sawargaon, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded. ... APPLICANTS. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra. ... RESPONDENTS. ... Shri S.J. Salgare, Advocate holdng for Smt. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for applicants. Shri V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for State. ... CORAM : S.B. DESHMUKH AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 31st MARCH, 2010. PER COURT: 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned A.P.P. waives service on behalf of the State. By consent of the parties, taken up for hearing. 3. The appeal filed by the present applicants was before this Court and has been admitted. There is one more appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.48 of 2010 filed by original accused Nos.5 and 6 who have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A r.w.34 I.P.C. The said appeal is also admitted. 4. The present applicants were accused Nos.1 to 4 in Sessions Case No.34 of 2008. There were two more accused persons i.e. accused No.5 Smt. Sakhubai w/o Raosaheb Bhalke and accused No.6 Raosaheb s/o Govindrao Bhalke. Sakhubai is sister of the present applicant No.1 Amrut s/o Manikrao Bedre and Raosaheb is brother-in-law of applicant no.1. All the accused persons including the present applicants were charged with the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 302 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. All of them were tried. The learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Kandhar, on trial, convicted the applicants – original accused 3 Nos.1 to 4 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. All the applicants have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and each one is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, each one has to further undergo R.I. For 15 days. The present applicants have also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A r.w. 34 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine, each one has to undergo R.I. For 7 days. Applicant No.1 is further convicted for offence punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C., and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer further R.I. for 7 days. The original accused Nos.3 to 6 were on bail during the trial. After recording conviction, the learned trial Court directed them to surrender to their bail. From the endorsement appearing on the body of the judgment annexed with the appeal, it appears that fine amount of Rs.500/- each, total Rs.1000/- is deposited by accused Nos.5 and 6 in the trial Court. 5. It is not in dispute that the present applicants 4 have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. The applicants have raised a plea that they may be released on bail during pendency of their appeal. 6. We have gone through the material brought on record on behalf of the prosecution. In substance, the alleged incident had taken place on 19th June, 2008 at the house of applicants around 6.30 a.m. Deceased Jaishri was wife of applicant no.1. Their marriage took place some where in the year, 2003. The couple had been blessed with a daughter Namrata. Married life of applicant no.1 and Jaishri was blissful for a short span of 6 months. Thereafter, applicant no.1 started extending harassment to deceased Jaishri. The reason, according to the prosecution, was alleged black complexion of deceased. According to the prosecution, father-in- law, brother-in-law of the deceased were inciting the applicant no.1 for extending harassment to the deceased Jaishri. The applicant no.1 was intending for remarriage. On the day of incident i.e. on 19th June, 2008 at about 6.30 a.m., the applicant no.1 asked deceased Jaishri to leave the matrimonial house 5 along with her clothes and belongings. She refused and started running away. She was forced into the house. Applicant no.1 poured kerosene on the person of deceased Jaishri. She was put ablaze. Villagers forced open the door and deceased Jaishri was rushed to the hospital initially at Loha and thereafter, she was shifted to Government Hospital, Nanded. Two dying declarations have been recorded. First one is Exh.29 recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nanded on 19th June, 2008 at 12.45 p.m. Another dying declaration is claimed to have been recorded by the Police Officer i.e. Investigating Officer, which is at Exh.51. This was recorded, according to the prosecution, on the same day i.e. 19th June, 2008 at about 7 p.m. Before and after recording both these dying declarations, according to the prosecution, deceased Jaishri was examined by Medical Officer and found fit to give statement. According to the prosecution, deceased Jaishri was keeping good health and her mental condition was also good while recording both these dying declarations. She has detailed the participation of all the accused persons. According to the prosecution, all the accused persons have committed murder of deceased 6 Jaishri on the date of incident. 7. To prove the case alleged against the present applicants, the prosecution has adduced oral as well as documentary evidence. Record and proceedings has been called for. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the applicants and A.P.P., we have gone through the Record & proceedings. We have minutely considered both the dying declarations at Exhibits 29 and 51. According to the applicants, there is no material against them to refuse bail. Per contra, the learned A.P.P. points the observations of the learned trial Court in paragraph 13 of the judgment. According to him, the learned trial Judge has considered both the dying declarations (written dying declarations) and found that there is no variance in those two dying declarations. According to him, both the dying declarations are consistent and have established case against the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 302 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. Apart from these two dying declarations, A.P.P. submits that there are two more oral dying declarations. To prove those oral dying declarations, PW-2 Ramdas Ballure and PW-4 Bhujangrao 7 Ballure have been examined on behalf of the prosecution. According to him, applicants are not entitled for suspension of sentence and release on bail. 8. We have given anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties. We have minutely gone through the judgment of the trial Court especially, on the analysis of two written dying declarations. The present is the case of multiple dying declarations. Undisputedly, two are written dying declarations and two are oral dying declarations. On assessment of the material brought on record at this stage, in our view, applicant No.2 father-in-law, applicant no.3 mother-in-law and applicant No.4 brother-in-law of the deceased can be considered for their release on bail. These are our observations for prima facie considering the plea raised by the applicants for release on bail. However, according to us, there is no case for grant of bail in favour of applicant no.1 husband of the deceased Jaishri. 9. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to 8 reject the application of applicant no.1 Amrut s/o Manikrao Bedre. However, we are inclined to grant bail in favour of the applicants No.2 to 4. The applicant No.2 Manikrao s/o Dadarao Bedre, applicant No.3 Bhagirathibai w/o Manikrao Bedre and applicant No.4 Bhimrao s/o Manikrao Bedre are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- each with one surety in the like amount. They are directed to deposit fine imposed for the offence under Section 302 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. in trial Court, if already not deposited. The applicants No.2 to 4 are directed to attend Malakoli Police Station, once in every quarter, preferably on first Sunday of the month during 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. First such attendance shall be on 11th April, 2010 at Malakoli Police Station, taluka Loha, District Nanded and thereafter, once in every quarter, preferably first Sunday of the month during 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. The applicants 2 to 4 shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Bonds in trial Court. Liberty to the State to move this Court for 9 cancellation of bail of applicants No.2 to 4 in case of breach of the conditions imposed on them. The application so far as applicants No.2 to 4 are concerned, is allowed and Rule is made absolute in above terms. So far as applicant No.1 Amrut is concerned, his application is rejected and disposed of. [ S.S. SHINDE, J ] [ S.B. DESHMUKH, J ] kadam/*