Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/6160/2011 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6160 of 2011
=================================================
SANJAY
CHINTAMANI MISHRA
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT
=================================================
Appearance :
Mr
ZUBIN F BHARDA for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR RC KODEKAR, PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) :
1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date
: 12/05/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Rule.
Mr Kodekar, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf
of the State.
The
applicant prays for regular bail in connection with the offences
registered with Bilimora Police Station, vide C.R.No.II 53 of 2010
for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 302 of the
IPC.
I
have heard learned advocate Mr Zubin Bharda for the applicant and Mr
RC Kodekar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent –
State and perused the charge-sheet papers.
Prima
facie, it appears that there are inconsistent versions of the
deceased as regards the incident in question at different intervals.
The FIR dated 16th May 2010 lodged by the father of the
deceased would suggest that when he reached the hospital after
learning about the burn injuries sustained by his daughter i.e. the
deceased, he inquired with his daughter in the ICU as to what had
happened, and, in reply to the same, deceased is said to have made an
oral dying declaration that on the date of the incident there was a
quarrel between the applicant herein and the deceased as the
accused-applicant was not going for work for the past 17 days.
Deceased is said to have further stated before her father that as the
husband was not going for work and there were monetary constraints in
the family, she picked up a plastic bottle of kerosene, doused
herself and then, set herself on fire. She has further stated in the
oral dying declaration that no sooner she was on fire, she started
raising the shouts as a result of which accused-applicant immediately
rushed and extinguished the fire by pouring water on her. This
version of the deceased, first in point of time before her father in
the form of oral dying declaration, would suggest that it was an
attempt to commit suicide. Further, when the deceased was taken to
the hospital, the history of the case, recorded by the Doctor speaks
about accidental burns while cooking, as narrated by the deceased and
her relatives. On 16th May 2010 Dying Declaration came to
be recorded by the Executive Magistrate, Gandevi, in which, in
answer to question No.7 the deceased replied that on the date of the
incident at about 8.30 to 9.00 AM in the morning the husband asked
her for cup of tea. At that point of time there was a quarrel and
her husband got excited and gave her a push as a result of which she
fell down on the cooking gas stove because of which she received burn
injuries. That immediately her husband poured water on her and her
inlaws came over there running. In reply to question No.11 she
stated that nobody has done this act purposely or with any intention.
Husband loves her, but at times, such incidents of quarrel ensue
when he gets angry.
In
the papers of the charge sheet the Investigating Agency has also
placed a statement recorded of the accused-applicant herein in the
form of a Dying Declaration wherein, the accused-applicant has
explained as to how the deceased had set herself on fire and as to
how he extinguished the fire by pouring water. It is only after a
period of almost 10 days that a second Dying Declaration came to be
recorded by the Executive Magistrate, Surat wherein deceased stated
that her husband poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire, on
the basis of which the charge-sheet has been filed for offence of
murder.
Prima
facie, it appears that the deceased has narrated different versions
at different intervals. Prima facie, it appears to be a case of
suicide. It would be important to note that the accuse-applicant
herein has also sustained burn injuries at the time when he tried to
extinguish the fire on the body of his wife, that is, the deceased.
Even as per the case of the deceased herself, the husband used to
love her and there was no such problem as such. Taking into
consideration different versions as narrated by the deceased, the
oral dying declaration before the father, which was first in point of
time, the history given before the Doctor and other circumstances, I
am persuaded to exercise my discretion in favour of the
accused-applicant.
The
investigation is over and the charge sheet is filed.
The
interest of the prosecution can be protected by imposing certain
conditions.
Taking
into consideration the aforesaid prima facie aspects, I order release
of the accused-applicant on regular bail in
connection with offence registered with Bilimora Police Station,
being Crime Register No.II-53 of 2010 on his executing a bond in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one
solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
lower Court and subject to the conditions that he shall,
[a] not take undue advantage of or misuse liberty;
[b] maintain
law and order and should co-operate with the investigating officer;
[c] not
act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
[d] surrender
his passport, if any, to the lower court
within a week;
[e] shall mark
his presence before the concerned police station on 1st
and 4th Sunday between 10 AM and 5 PM;
[f] not leave
the local limits of the State of Gujarat without prior permission of
the Sessions Judge concerned;
[g] shall not
enter not Surat City limits where his in-laws aer residing;
[h] shall not
approach any of the family members of the deceased
[i] furnish the
address of his residence at the time of execution of the bond and
shall not change the residence without prior permission of this
Court.
The
authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in
connection with any other offence for the time being.
If
breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions
Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant
or take appropriate action in the matter.
Bail
bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try
the case. This application is allowed.
Rule
is made absolute. D.S. Permitted.
(J.B.Pardiwala,
J.)
*mohd
Top