RAM NARAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second bail application. The first bail application came to be dismissed on 4-4-2006 as it was not pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner appearing therein.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Carefully gone through the Challan papers and the statements of PW 1 Banwari. PW 2 Satya Narain and PW 3 Hem Raj recorded by the trial Court. I have also carefully gone through the statements of witness Khyali Ram who alleged to have came on the spot at the time of the occurrence. The deceased himself made a statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that Banwari and Leelu came on the spot and tried to extinguish the fire.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Banwari has stated that he asked deceased Prabhu Dayal as to how he caught the fire, whereupon the deceased informed that he himself lit the fire. In cross- examination, he categorically stated that neither petitioner Ram Narain nor his wife or daughter had lit the fire. On the contrary,the petitioner, his wife and daughter tried to extinguish the fire. Similar is the statement of PW 2 Hem Raj, who, on reaching the place of occurrence, inquired from the deceased as to how he caught the fire and the deceased informed that he himself sprinkled the diesel on his body and lit the fire.