1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA)NO. 83/2011 ( Prabhakar Kundlik Gadak and ors. .vs. State of Mah. Through PSO PS Buldhana City, Buldhana. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. M.M. Khan, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. A.S. Sonare, APP for Respondent. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : MARCH 14, 2011 Heard. By this application, the applicants charge sheeted by Buldhana City Police Station in connection with Crime No. 176/2010 registered with said Police station for offence under Sections 302, 498-A read with 34 of IPC have prayed for bail. The said crime was registered upon the dying declaration of victim Annapurna recorded by Executive Magistrate immediately on the day of incident i.e. on 7.9.2010 after she was admitted at Government Hospital, Buldhana. Applicant no.1 is the father-in-law of the said victim, applicant no.2 is the husband while applicant no.3 is the mother-in-law of the victim. Initially the offence under 2 Sections 307 and 498-A read with 34 of IPC was registered and after victim succumbed to the death on 11.9.2010 due to 86 % burn injuries sustained by her, the offence of murder was added to the crime earlier registered. Though the learned APP has objected prayer for bail made on behalf of the applicants, still objection raised for granting bail to applicant no.2 does not appear to be well founded as it is difficult to perceive that the material in the charge sheet prima facie shows his involvement in commission of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Such a prima facie inference emerges as the main material in the charge sheet which is in the shape of dying declarations fails to depict any overt act on part of applicant no.2 in the incident in which the kerosene was poured on the body of the victim in the bathroom and she was set on fire. On the contrary, the said material prima facie reveals that at the time of the incident the applicant no.2 was sleeping. In view of the same, the prayer for bail made by him will deserve consideration. However, the case regarding applicants no.1 and 3 appears to be different as their involvement in the offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life is prima facie borne from the said material i.e. two dying declarations and so also other material on the record. Needless to state that the matter stated in both the dying declarations is consistent and the same is found corroborated by the other material collected during the investigation i.e. the material seized at the time of scene of offence panchanama. Though the learned counsel for 3 the applicants tried to canvass the prayer for bail on the count of the applicants no.1 and 3 being aged persons, hardly any material regarding their age has been placed on the record. Having regard to the same and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the crime which amongst other reveals that applicants no. 1 and 3 were not permitting their son applicant no.2 to cohabit with the victim at the behest of a person by name Maharaj who was residing in the neighbourhood and prima facie the involvement of the applicants no.1 and 3 being borne in commission of the offences punishable with death and imprisonment for life, the prayer for bail made by them cannot be acceded with. The application made by applicants no.1 and 3 stands rejected. The applicant no.2 is directed to be released on bail in connection with said crime upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in like amount subject to the conditions that applicant no. 2 (i) shall attend the City Police Station, Buldhana in between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm on every day for a period of 15 days and, thereafter, on every alternate day for next 15 days and, thereafter, on every Monday until further orders, (ii) shall stay at the address mentioned in the application and shall not leave the same without the permission of the trial court, (iii) shall not indulge in any activity of tampering prosecution evidence and/or indulge in any activity hampering the progress of the trial, 4 (iv) shall not commit any offence while on bail. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE halwai