SAU VATSALABAI GHANWAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr R.M. Daga, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr S. S. Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State. Applicant is seeking pre arrest bail in Crime No. 171/2011 registered with Police Station, Mehkar for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant strenuously contended that there is delay of more than one month in lodging FIR and that the dying declaration recorded by Head Constable is shrouded with suspicion and is not reliable. He further contends that relatives of deceased Urmila stated before the police that Uma had disclosed to them in a hospital at Aurangabad that since her marriage was against her wishes, she poured kerosene on her person and set herself on fire. Learned counsel, therefore, prayed that pre arrest bail may be granted to the applicant.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has invited my attention to dying declaration dated 19.11.2011 which was recorded at 12.35 hours wherein deceased Urmila stated her name, age, occupation, residence and details of family members. She made a disclosure of incident and stated that on 18.11.2011 after cooking when she went to sleep, her husband beat her and her mother in law Vatsalabai (present applicant) poured kerosene on her person and set her on fire. According to her, her husband s cousin brother Deelip removed her to Government Hospital at Mehkar and thereafter to Aurangabad. Learned APP submits that the dying declaration bears the signature of head constable who recorded it; thumb impression of Urmila and that the concerned Medical Officer has certified about the fitness of patient to give dying declaration.