1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1757 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 279 OF 2009 Ishwar s/o Tukaram Mokale Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. R.V.Gore, advocate for the applicant. Mrs.S.S.Autade, A.P.P. For Respondent-State. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 15 th June, 2009. P.C.: 1 Heard Shri Gore, learned Counsel for the applicant and Smt.S.S.Autade, learned A.P.P. For Respondent-State. 2 Accused-applicant is convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of I.P.C. and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months. He is also held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and is sentenced to 2 suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer, R.I. For one month. 3 It is stated by the applicant that he was on bail during the course of trial. The prosecution mainly relies upon the dying declaration of the deceased recorded on 15.03.2007. In the said dying declaration, deceased had categorically stated that she was forcibly made to leave the matrimonial home by the accused some six months prior to the incident. The illtreatment alleged in the dying declaration is of the period prior to six months and deceased had set herself on fire and committed suicide at her parents’ house. Considering these circumstances, accused-applicant cannot be said to be a person instrumental in abating the act alleged by the prosecution. 4 It appears from the judgment of the trial Court that the prosecution has improved the story put up by the deceased in her dying declaration and has come with the case in respect of cohabitation of husband and wife some 15 days prior to the incident. The prosecution version, in that respect, is clearly an addition and improvement, which is of material character. Considering the facts and circumstances placed 3 on record, accused-applicant needs to be released on bail, during the pendency of appeal. Moreover, the appeal is also not likely to be taken up for final hearing and disposal, shortly. In this view of the matter, application deserves to be allowed. 5 Criminal Application is allowed. The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed against accused-applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, on 24.04.2009 in Sessions Case No.120 of 2008, stands suspended, during the pendency of appeal. Accused-applicant Ishwar s/o Tukaram Mokale is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten thousand) with one surety in the like amount. Bail before the trial Court. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/criappln175709