This court disposed of a bail application filed by a life-convicted murder convict. The applicant argued about inconsistent dying declarations and lack of motive. The High Court rejected the bail application, dismissing the prayers. The record was ordered to be sent back.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
cra707.12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.707 OF 2012 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.79 OF 2012
Venkatesh s/o Ramling Kaulge,
Age-36 years, Occu:Labour,
R/o-Datta Nagar, Osmanabad,
Tq. & Dist-Osmanabad.
...APPLICANT.
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra,
Through City Police Station,
Osmanabad, Dist-Osmanabad.
...RESPONDENT.
...
Shri.V.B. Deshmukh Advocate for Applicant.
Shri.V.D. Rakh, A.P.P. for Respondents.
...
CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND
T.V. NALAWADE, JJ.
DATE : 6TH MARCH, 2012.
PER COURT :
1.Heard learned counsel for the parties.
cra707.12
2
2.The Applicant is charged for committing
murder of his wife by pouring kerosene on her
person and setting her on fire. The Applicant is
convicted for the offence punishable under Section
302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
suffer imprisonment for life, in Sessions Case
No.67 of 2011, by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Osmanabad, by Judgment and Order dated 27th
January, 2012.
3.The Applicant prays for bail pending
hearing and final disposal of the Appeal, which
was admitted by this Court on 21st February, 2012.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the
Applicant submits that three dying declarations of
deceased Radha, wife of the Applicant, were
recorded, one by the Constable, one by Naib
Tahsildar and another by A.P.I. The dying
declarations are inconsistent. There is no motive
cra707.12
3
to cause bodily injuries to the wife. The
Applicant suffered 15% burn injuries, which
according to the counsel, shows innocence of the
Applicant and his efforts to save life of his
wife.
5.The learned A.P.P. has opposed the bail
Application.
6.We have perused original Record and
Proceedings. We have perused the dying
declarations. The doctor recorded consciousness
and orientation of the deceased while dying
declaration was recorded by the Naib Tahsildar. In
all these dying declarations, we found that the
deceased had blamed the Applicant for pouring
kerosene on her person and setting her on fire.
The couple had married life of seven years. They
were blessed with two children. The incident took
place in day time. The dying declaration was
promptly recorded. The doctor who conducted post
cra707.12
4
mortem, opined that the death was caused due to
shock due to superficial to deep burns of 88%.
7.Considering the evidence on record, the
findings reached by the trial Court and the fact
that the Applicant was behind bars during the
trial, we are not inclined to release the
Applicant on bail. The Application is rejected.
8.The Record and Proceedings be sent back.
[T.V. NALAWADE,J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.]
asb/MAR12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant convicted of murder should be released on bail pending the hearing of the criminal appeal.
Venkatesh s/o Ramling Kaulge
The State of Maharashtra
NARESH H. PATIL
T.V. NALAWADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court