1 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 69 OF 2010 1. Haridas Jalindar Surve 2. Mr. Jalindar Vithoba Surve .. Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. V.T. Tulpule, Senior Advocate with Mr. J.H. Sawant for the applicants. Mrs. M.R. Tidke, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 1ST FEBRUARY 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicants seeks bail in connection with C.R. No. 251 of 2009 registered at R.A.K. Marg Police Station, Mumbai. Initially the offence was registered 2 under section 498­A read with 34 of the I.P.C. Subsequently, on the occurring of the death, the offence was converted into 302 of the I.P.C. 3. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant no.1 is the husband and the applicant no.2 is the father­in­law of Dhanashree Surve (since deceased). The applicants were harassing the deceased after the marriage on account of the applicant no.1 having illicit relations with another woman. On 12th September 2009 at about 8.15 a.m., the applicants poured kerosene on the deceased and burnt her alive. The deceased was admitted to the hospital. Initially, she gave a statement on 12th September 2009 before the Special Executive Magistrate, in which she stated that she herself burnt her by pouring kerosene. Her second statement was recorded by the police on the next day, i.e. 13th September 2009, in which she implicated the applicants. The applicants were arrested on 3 14th September 2009 and since then they are in custody. 4. There is a variance between the first statement which is in the shape of a dying declaration recorded before the Special Executive Magistrate on 12th September 2009 and the second statement recorded by the police on 13th September 2009. In the dying declaration, the deceased stated that she poured kerosene on herself and she herself lit the fire. In the second statement, she stated that the first statement was given on account of pressure of the applicant no.1 (husband) who had threatened that he would cause harm to their two children to were in his custody. Truth or otherwise of the second statement would be required to be ascertained at trial. In any event, there is a variance between the two statements, i.e. first recorded before the Special Executive Magistrate and the second recorded before the police. 4 5. In view of these circumstances and also the fact that the applicants are in custody for more than 4 months and a considerable time would be required for commencement of the trial, the applicants can be granted bail. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER The applicants be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond of Rs.20,000/­ with one surety of the like amount subject to the conditions that the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall record their attendance at the concerned police station once a month between 1st and 5th day of every British calendar month till the conclusion of the trial. Any breach of the conditions would result in cancellation of bail. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)