1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 268 OF 2011 Hamida Begum wd/o Gulab Khan VERSUS The State of Mah. Through Ministry of Home, Mantralaya, Mumbai and 2 others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's or Judge's orders Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Sajid H. Shahid, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Khubalkar, APP for the State. CORAM : MRS.V.K. TAHILRAMANI & M.L.TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATE : 22.6. 2011 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The case of the petitioner is that Akramkhan was her son. He was married to Baby Naz. On 6.10.2011 Akramkhan had sustained burn injuries and he was taken to the hospital. According to the petitioner, her daughter-in-law Baby Naz had set Akramkhan on fire and caused his death. Her grievance is that her FIR implicating her daughter-in-law in relation with the death of Akramkhan is not being registered by the police. 3. The affidavit filed by the Police Inspector of Nandanwan Police Station shows that Akramkhan was admitted in the hospital with burn injuries. Two dying declarations came to be registered – one was recorded by the Executive Magistrate and the second was recorded by the police. In both the dying declarations Akramkhan has stated that at the time of incident his wife had gone to the latrine. He was lighting the mosquito 2 coil. At that time burning match-stick fell on his terricot clothes and his clothes caught fire. He shouted for help. Meanwhile, his wife Baby Naz came there and tried to extinguish fire by putting a blanket on his person. She also called some persons from the neighborhood and with their help he was taken to the hospital. Statements of 16 other witnesses, who were residing in the locality, have been recorded. Statement of Sahidkhan @ Aman, the son of the deceased, has been recorded. He has stated that at the relevant time he was sleeping. None of the statements show involvement of Baby Naz in relation to the incident. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that her statement and statement of the two sons of the deceased, was not recorded. Sahidkhan is the elder son of the deceased and the second son at the relevant time was five years old. The statement of Sahidkhan @ Aman has been recorded. It is categorically stated by the APP that the investigation is still going on. The learned APP stated that the police went to record the statement of the petitioner but she refused to give her statement. In any event, it is noticed that it is not even the case of the petitioner that she is an eye witness to the incident as she was residing separately from her son and his wife Baby Naz. However, looking to the grievance of the petitioner, the investigation agency is directed to record the statement of the petitioner. The petitioner to cooperate and to give her statement. After recording the statement of the petitioner and on completion of investigation, the investigation agency to take appropriate steps. Writ petition is disposed of with above direction. JUDGE JUDGE Hirekhan 3