(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3406 of 2011 1. Paryagbai w/o. Kishan Bengal, Age : 72 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Kolsa, Taluka : Sengaon, District : Hingoli. 2. Usha w/o. Santosh Bengal, Age : 30 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. As above. .. Applicants. versus The State of Maharashtra, Through Sengaon Police Station, Sengaon, District : Hingoli. .. Respondent. ....................... Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. G.R. Ingole, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. ........................ (2) CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 17TH AUGUST 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned respective Counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by applicant nos.1 and 2 seeking bail in connection with Crime No. 19/2011, registered with Police Station, Sengaon (District : Hingoli), for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that the FIR came to be registered on the basis of the dying declaration given by the victim, namely, Archana, on 19-3-2011. It is alleged in the said dying declaration that on 19-3-2011 at about 8.00 a.m., complainant Archana (now deceased) was at her residence, and the applicants and the co- accused started asking her as to why she did not attend the field. At this juncture, her husband i.e. co-accused, as well as, applicants herein gave abuses to her. The applicant no.1 Paryagbai, who is mother-in-law of the victim, as well as father- in-law of the victim, poured kerosene on her person, whereas the brother-in-law and his wife i.e. applicant no.2 Usha caught hold (3) of her and husband of the victim set her on fire, and thereby victim sustained burn injuries. Thereafter she was brought to the hospital. Initially, offence was registered under Sections 307, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. However, subsequently, victim Archana expired on 23rd March 2011, and hence, offence was converted into Sections 302, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 4. The investigation papers have been made available by the learned APP for perusal purpose, and on perusal thereof, it appears that the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed. 5. Apparently, there is dying declaration of the victim Archana, as well as, statements of witnesses and medical evidence showing complicity of the applicants in the commission of the crime which is a serious offence. Moreover, there are specific allegations against applicant nos.1 and 2, and overt act has been attributed towards applicant no.1, as well as, applicant no.2, during occurrence of the incident, that the applicant no.1 along with her husband poured kerosene on the person of the victim from kerosene can, whereas applicant no.2 herein along with her husband, caught hold of hands and legs of the victim when she was set on fire, and hence, there is prima facie (4) incriminating evidence against applicant no.1, as well as, applicant no.2, and therefore, present application deserves to be rejected. 6. However, it is submitted that the applicant no.1 Paryagbai is an old woman aged about 72 years, and therefore, her application be considered sympathetically under the proviso of Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 7. Having comprehensive view of the matter, I am of the opinion that since the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, the application of applicant no.1 Paryagbai can be considered for the grant of bail since she is woman of old age i.e. 72 years, but the application of applicant no.2 Usha deserves to be rejected. 8. In the result, Criminal Application is allowed partly, and it is directed that the applicant no.1 Paryagbai w/o. Kishan Bengal be released on bail, on her furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and surety in the like amount, on the conditions (i) that she shall give attendance before the Trial Court once in a quarter, and (ii) she shall not influence upon prosecution witnesses and/or tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner, whatsoever, directly or indirectly. (5) However, application of applicant no.2 Usha w/o. Santosh Bengal stands dismissed. Present Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/ka3406