{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2054 OF 2010 Nasimbee Badshah Saiyad Age-35 years, Occ-Housewife R/o Savalivirwadi, Tq-Rahata Dist-Ahmednagar APPLICNAT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for the applicant Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 18 th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By filing the present application, the applicant has prayed to release her on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest in connection with CR No.25/2010 registered with Shirdi police station for an offence punishable u/s 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. It appears that interim protection is granted to the applicant vide order dated 11.06.2010 that in the event of her {2} arrest in connection with the present offence, she be released on bail. 3. It appears that the said offence is registered on the basis of dying declaration of one Nafeesabee, recorded at 6.40 p.m. on 14.02.2010. It is alleged by the victim that in the night of 13th February 2010 at about 8 p.m. she was set on fire by pouring kerosene on her person. Admittedly, this dying declaration is recorded by the Executive Magistrate. It further appears that said Nafeesabee expired at 4.05 p.m. on 15th February 2010. Thereafter, ADR was recorded on 17th February 2010 and after conducting investigation, FIR came to be registered on 18th February 2010. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has asserted that so far as the dying declaration, which is recorded on 14th February 2010 and on the basis of which the offence is registered, is concerned, the same does not bear endorsement of the doctor. In this offence husband and brother in law of the victim have been arrested. Charge sheet is also filed in this offence and the present applicant is shown as absconding and measure u/s 299 of the Criminal Procedure Code are being resorted to against the present applicant. 5. Now, the point for my consideration is that whether the dying declaration of the deceased can be termed as true beyond {3} doubt or whether the same raises suspicion and has to be considered in the light of the papers, which form part of the charge sheet. It appears that on 14.02.2010, on requisition of the Head Constable B.C. No.2392, Mr.S.L.Chaudhari, endorsement was given by Dr.Amit, at 5.00 p.m. that the patient is not in sound and fit condition to give statement. It appears that thereafter the Executive Magistrate was summoned, however, he noticed that the condition of the said patient at 5.45 p.m. was not mentally and physically fit to record the dying declaration. It appears that within 30 minutes thereafter, the dying declaration was recorded at 6.40 p.m. and and on the basis of the same, the offence is registered, implicating the applicant along with others. It appears that the dying declaration is not free from doubt. Hence, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. Interim protection granted on 11th June 2010 is hereby confirmed and the same to remain in force for a period of two weeks from today, within which time, the applicant may appear before the concerned Sessions Court and may apply for regular bail. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2054-10