BHAURAO ABAJI DHANDRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant is facing charge of murder of his wife under Section 302 of I. P. C. THE bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli, vide order dated 16/4/2001. Learned Advocate for the applicant urged before me that the prosecution case rests solely on the dying declaration and before recording the said dying declaration, the doctor has not certified that the deceased was in a fit condition to make a statement and besides that the applicant had himself suffered 43 per cent burns. He, therefore, contends that in the light of the evidence on record, the applicant be released on bail. Learned A. P. P. , on the other hand, urged before me that the evidence against the applicant is not only consisting the dying declaration but the statements of parents of the deceased who have stated that the deceased was being ill treated by the applicant and that as per dying declaration the applicant had put kerosene and burnt her while he was under influence of liquor and it is probable for this reason the applicant himself had also suffered injuries. He, therefore, contends that the bail application be rejected. THE marriage in this case has taken place more than ten years back and prior to the incident, there is no complaint of ill treatment as such. THE dying declaration in case has been recorded by the Executive Magistrate, who, before recording the statement of the deceased, asked the District Health Officer to certify whether the deceased was in a position to give the statement and give his opinion in this respect. THE doctor did not record any certificate and simply signed the said letter. At the end of the recording of the statement also, the only endorsement is made that the patient gave her statement. In addition, the applicant is reported to have himself suffered 43 per cent burns for which no explanation whatsoever was given in the reply though some explanation was put forth before me by learned A. P. P. In this set of facts, I am of the opinion that the applicant be enlarged on bail upon execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli, on the following conditions. (i) That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. (ii) That the applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without obtaining prior permission of Sessions Court having jurisdiction and in case the said applicant has to go from his residence to other parts of Maharashtra, he shall leave an advance information about it, as to the place and duration where he would be staying, with the Sessions Court having jurisdiction and also the Investigation Officer. THE application stands disposed of accordingly. Application allowed.