1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3572 OF 2011 Dattarao s/o Chandrabhan Deshmukh & anr. ...Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Shri M.V.Ghatge, advocate for applicants Shri D.R.Korde, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 29th August, 2011 PER COURT : 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for perusal purpose and heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2 2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 and 2 seeking regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 2 of 2011, registered at Hadgaon police station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by Ayodhya Shankar Deshmukh on 15.1.2011. 4 It appears from the contents of the first information report that on 7.11.2011 at about 10.00 a.m., complainant Ayodhya along with her two children, namely Rishikesh and Nandkishor was at home and was cleaning utensils. At that juncture, applicant nos. 1 and 2 entered into her house unauthorizedly and abused her stating that, “Tu Marun Ja, Tula Marun Takto” and both of them poured kerosene on her person from can and applicant no.2 Rajeshar @ Raju lit the match stick and threw it on her person and set her on fire. Thereupon, victim Ayodhya shouted and came out of the house, as well as her children also started shouting. Thereupon, her husband, 3 namely Shankar Deshmukh and brother-in-law, namely Ganpat Rangrao Deshmukh poured water on her person and extinguished the fire, but by the said time, applicants fled away. Accordingly, names of applicant nos. 1 and 2 have been reflected in the contents of the first information report and specific role has been attributed to each of them in the occurrence of the incident. 5 Moreover, the statement made by them, “Tu Marun Ja, Tula Marun Takto” apparently indicates the intention of the applicants to commit murder of the victim. It is submitted that the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and victim also has been discharged from the hospital. Considering the specific allegations against the applicants and role attributed to each of them in the occurrence of the incident and before the occurrence of the incident considering the very statement made by them, present application deserves to be rejected. 6 However, considering the position that applicant no.1 Dattarao Chandrabhan Deshmukh is about 70 years old and 4 infirm and since investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, the application of applicant no.1 Dattarao can be considered under the proviso to Section 437 (II) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by imposing certain conditions on him; whereas the application of applicant no.2 Rajeshwar @ Raju Dattarao Deshmukh deserves to be rejected. 7 In the result, present application is partly allowed to the extent of applicant no.1 Dattarao Chandrabhan Deshmukh and it is directed that he be released on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions. (i) After release, applicant no.1 shall not enter into the village, namely Irapur, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded, till the disposal of trial, but applicant no.1 shall furnish his address of residence to the investigating officer forthwith. (ii) Applicant no.1 shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. 5 8 Application of applicant no. 2 Rajeshwar @ Raju Dattarao Deshmukh stands dismissed. 9 The above observations are prima facie in nature and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding the same on merits. 10 The present application stands disposed of finally. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3572.11