{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2261 OF 2009 Sarojine d/o Pralhadrao Amrutwar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.M.D.Narwadkar, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State Mr.S.P.Katnewshwarkar, Advocate for respondent No.2. ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 21st January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application, u/s 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant, who is an accused in CR No.82/2009 registered with Wasmat police station for an offence u/s 306, 323, 504 r/w 34 of the IPC, has prayed to quash the FIR registered against her. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of APP and learned counsel for respondent No.2. {2} 3. Admittedly, after filing of this application, investigation in the said offence is over and the charge sheet has been filed in the Court of JMFC, Wasmat. 4. Perusal of papers of investigation indicates that the alleged incident took place on 29.04.2009 in the residential premises of the victim and the complaint is lodged by the husband of the victim. It is alleged that the applicant, who works as a staff nurse in the Rural Hospital, was residing in the house of the victim as tenant since last 4 months of the incident. It is further alleged that the behaviour of the applicant is indecent and though she was staying alone, other male persons used to visit her during odd hours of night. The said behaviour of the applicant was not liked by the victim, who was land lady of the said house. When the victim had objected the extra marital affairs of the applicant, quarrel took place between the applicant and the victim. Subsequently, instead of behaving properly, the applicant gave threats to the victim of dire consequences that if she did not stop her objection to her illicit relations she would be eliminated. It is also alleged that due to the said mental harassment and particularly on the date of the incident, when the dispute aroused, the applicant abused the victim and also assaulted her, the victim could not tolerate the same and hence by pouring kerosene on her person, she set her on fire and committed suicide. 5. It is urged on behalf of the applicant that the story {3} narrated in the complaint cannot be accepted as probable. It is also contended that after the victim came to be admitted in a hospital her statements are recorded twice. According to learned counsel for the applicant, bare perusal of the dying declarations of the victim would disclose that the victim had sustained the burn injuries accidentally and she has not committed suicide due to quarrel between herself and the victim, as alleged. Learned counsel for applicant has also contended that there is delay in lodging the FIR. 6. So far as complaint is concerned, the complainant is an eye witness to the said incident and the complaint has to be considered in the light of two dying declarations. According to learned counsel for applicant, the two consistent dying declarations of the victim would disclose that the death of the victim is an accidental death. It is urged that as per the dying declarations, it can be gathered that while preparing tea, as the sari of the victim got struck with the nob of the stove, she caught fire, which has resulted into her death. However, Panchanama of the spot of incident does not disclose that any stove was found at the spot. If the stove is not found on the spot and an empty can of kerosene and match box is found, the said fact corroborates the allegations in the compliant and discards the story of accidental burns as per two dying declarations. At this stage, it requires to take note that the said dying declarations are recorded in the Government Hospital and the applicant is also a nurse in {4} Government hospital, though at a different station. In the premise, at this stage possibility of suicide due to quarrel, cannot be ruled out. In the premise, prima faice, it does not appear that the complaint is false. 7. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands dismissed. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln2261-09