Anil Ramdas Borse vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 1812 Bom

                                                                                 10. cri appa 469-17.doc


RMA      
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 469 OF 2017
                                               IN
                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 247 OF 2013


            Anil Ramdas Borse                                             .. Applicant

                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra                                      .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
            Appearances
            Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Applicant
            Mr. H.J. Dedia      APP for the State
                                                   ...................



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              M.S. KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : APRIL 18, 2017.

ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

1. Heard both sides.

2. The applicant has been convicted under Section 302 of

IPC for causing the death of his wife Aarti by setting her on

fire. The applicant is now seeking bail.

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3

10. cri appa 469-17.doc

3. The applicant had earlier preferred two applications for

bail being Criminal Application Nos. 334 of 2013 and 484 of

2016. These applications were rejected by orders dated

25.6.2013 and 18.4.2016 respectively. No sufficient ground

has been made out to necessitate the reconsideration of

prayer for bail. There are two dying declarations on record

i.e Exh. 28 and Exh. 33. They were recorded by PW 6 Shri.

Joshi and PW 8 PSI Patil respectively. Both the dying

declarations are consistent with the prosecution case. In

both the dying declarations, Aarti has stated that her

husband poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. The

prosecution has also brought motive on record. The motive

was that the applicant suspected the fidelity of his wife.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that Aarti

was not in a condition to make dying declarations. However,

the evidence of PW 9 Dr. Challani shows that Aarti was in a

fit condition to make a statement. In this view of the matter,

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3

10. cri appa 469-17.doc

we are not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The

application is rejected.

5. The appeal to be placed on final hearing board in the

week commencing from 5th June, 2017.

6. Office to communicate this order to the applicant who

is lodged in Nasik Road Central Prison, Nasik.

[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ]                   [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]




jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                          3 of 3