JUDGMENT 1. - This is an application under Section 439, Cr. PC on behalf of the four petitioners. The case is for offences under section 498A, 304B and 302 IPC. The incident is dated 6-11-91 at about 11.00 O'clock in the day in which Smt. Jyoti @ Munni W/o Shri Vishnu Sharma is alleged to have been set to fire and died of 100% burns on that very day at about 11.00 O'clock in the night. The petitioner No. 1, before me is the mother-in-law, petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are Jeth and Jethani and petitioner No. 4, Vishnu Sharma is the husband of deceased Smt. Jyoti. The dying-declaration of deceased Smt. 'Jyoti was recorded by the , .Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, No. 1 Kota at 6.28 P.M., the dying-declaration has been recorded in question answer form and the same is reproduced as under: T;ksfr iRuh fo".kq 'kekZ] czkgkz.k] 30 o"kZA fuoklh& MMokMk dksVkA iz'u & vkids 'kjhj ij ?kko dSls gks x;s\ mRrj & tyk fn;kA iz'u & fdlus tyk fn;k\ mRrj & esjh lkl] tsB] tsBkuh us rsy fNM+d dj tyk fn;kA iz'u & ;g ?kVuk dc o dgka gqbZ\ mRrj & ;g vkt lqcg djhc 11 cts dh ckr gS] eSa vius llqjky esa FkhA iz'u & vkidks D;ksa tyk fn;k\ mRrj & NksVh&NksVh ckr ij >xM+k gks tkrk FkkA iz'u & vkidh lkl] tsB] tsBkuh dk D;k uke gS\ mRrj & lkl dk 'kdqUryk] tsB dk lrh'k] tsBkuh ohuk gSA iz'u & vkidks dSls tyk;k\ mRrj & eSa lks jgh FkhA eq>s dqN ugha irkA lkl] tsB] tsBkuh dejs esa FksA iz'u & vkids ifr ml le; dgkWa Fks\ mRrj & ?kj esa ugha FksA iz'u & vkx fdlus cq>kbZ\ mRrj & ifr us vkx cq>kbZA iz'u & vkt lkl] tsB] tsBkuh ls >xM+k D;ksa gqvk Fkk\ mRrj & NksVh&NksVh ckr ij gqvk FkkA iz'u & vkidh lkl] tsB] vkfn vkils D;k pkgrs Fks\ mRrj & eq>s ugha j[kuk pkgrs FksA iz'u & vkils D;k ;s yksx :i;k ekaxrs Fks\ mRrj & ughaA NksVh&NksVh ckr ij >xM+k djrs FksA iz'u & vkidks vkSj D;k dguk gS\ mRrj & vkSj dqN ugha dguk pkgrhA vkj Jh ,.M ,0lh0 ,l0Mh0@& 6-28 ih0,e0 U;kf;d eftLV~sV izFke oxZ de dksVk ( jkt0 ) vkj Vh vkbZ T;ksfr 2. In this case besides the spot inspection report of the scene of the occurrence prepared by the police there is also a report prepared by the team of Forensic Science Laboratory. 3. I have heard the submission made with reference to the report of the team of the Forensic Science Laboratory and have also gone through certain photographs which were taken by the Police, though the photo- graphs taken by the team of the Forensic Science Laboratory have not been produced before me. Prima facie contents of the dying-declaration are not compatible with the report as prepared by the team of Forensic Science Laboratory about the scene of the occurrence. So far as the accused petitioner No. 4, that is the husband is concerned deceased Smt. Joyti has not raised any grievance against him in the dying-declaration rather she has stated that her husband came to her rescue and extinguished the fire. In the dying-declaration a specific question was put to her as to what did the mother-in-law, Jeth and Jethani wanted from her and she answered that they did not want to keep her and in answer to the question as to whether they were demanding money-she gave the answer in negative and said there used to be quarrels on trifles. 4. Mr. Mehrish, further argued that the husband and wife at the time of incident were living in a separate apartment in the same house in which the other petitioners were living but the apartment in which husband and wife were living had a separate opening on the road side, and he has submitted that in the instant case, there is no suicidal note left by deceased Smt. Joyti. Mr. S.K. Gupta, appearing for the complainant has invited my attention towards Section 113 A and Section 113 B of the Indian Evidence Act as also to the provisions of Section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 302 and 306 of IPC. 5. So far as the question of dowry death is concerned, the argument of Mr. Mehrish is that in the dying-declaration of deceased Smt. Joyti she has answered that no money was demanded from her and there used to be quarrels on trifles. There is no question of any dowry death in this case and, therefore, the presumption under section 113 B can't be conceived. Mr. Mehrish is that in the dying-declaration of deceased Smt. Joyti she has answered that no money was demanded from her and there used to be quarrels on trifles. There is no question of any dowry death in this case and, therefore, the presumption under section 113 B can't be conceived. Mr. Mehrish has submitted with reference to Section 113A that the presumption to be drawn under section 113A is a rebatable presumption and his submission is that this presumption has to be drawn having regard to all the circumstances of the case. Mr. Mehrish has submitted that the circumstances which are on record in this case including the report of the team of Fronesic Science Laboratory and other papers which are on record prima-facie negative such presumption and he has submitted that in any case having regard to the circumstances of this case the question of such presumption does not arise. 6. At this stage, it is very difficult to say as what has actually happened and as to whether its a case of suicide or a case of bride burning, but in the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory the chances of burning due to an accident in the kitchen-cum-store room which is attached to the apartment in which the couple was living has been ruled out. The learned Addl. P.P.. A Gaffar and Mr. Gupta had also read out the statements of certain witnesses including that of one Shri Pramod Sharma alias Lala S/o Shri Madan Lal Sharma. The father of Shri Vishnu Sharma and his father (Pramod) were friends and he has also stated that on the date of incident that is 6-11-91 at about 2.30 in the afternoon Mr. Sunil (Dewar of deceased) told this witness (Pramod Sharma) that " HkkHkh us vkx yxk yh " 7. He has also stated that Shiv Kumar Sharma i.e. father in law of deceased Smt. Jyoti (who had expired in September, 1991) had told that "deceased Smt. Jyoti had tried to catch naked electric wires" and, further, that his wife and his daughter-in-law used to quarrel and if anything goes wrong, it will be a catestrophe " [kqnk uk [kkLrk vxj xM+cM+ gks x;h rks vuFkZ gks tk;sxkA iqfyl dks [kcj dj nksA " and at that time this witness had also gone to the police station with Mr. Sunil and orally reported the matter to SHO, Soral Sahib, who told that it is a domestic dispute and get it mutually settled. As per the version of this witness Pramod Sharma alias Lala S/o Shri Madan Lal Sharma the incident of attempt to catch naked electric wires by Smt. Jyoti was 9 to 10 months old. Mr. Mehrish has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of this case it is very clear that the deceased Smt. Jyoti. had suicidal tendency and her in-laws had such apprehensions much prior to this incident. Mr. Mehrish has also submitted that of course there are certain letters in which the deceased Smt. Joyti has raised serious grievances against her in-laws, but the latest letter according to the prosecution is also dated 23-3-91 whereas this incident is dated 6-11-91 and, therefore, according to Mr. Mehrish it can not be said that deceased (Smt. Joyti) was subjected to cruelty, torture and harrassment soon before the incident, although there is evidence on record to show that she had been subjected to such cruelty, harrassment and torture in past. Mr. Mehrish has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of this case the accused-petitioners No. 1 to 3 are in jail since 13-12-91 when they were arrested while they were on way to surrender before the Court after rejection of their application for anticipatory bail under section 438, Cr. PC by this Court on 4-12-91 in which the Court had passed the following order while rejecting the bail application under section 438, Cr. PC which is reproduced as under : "I have gone through the case diary and not convinced that indulgence be given for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on compensatory grounds of sickness the application be accepted on behalf of Shakuntla and Veena Sharma. He has placed before me various certificates and X-rays from year 1988 onward from various Doctors and they may be relevant for consideration of an application after surrendering the accused before appropriate court. It is open to the petitioners to surrender before the appropriate court and move an application and place the certificates before that Court and it is expected that the court will give due consideration to the documents produced and shall decide the application forthwith. Certificates may be returned to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Application is dismissed as not pressed. Certificates may be returned to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Application is dismissed as not pressed. 8. The accused-petitioner No. 4, i.e. (Husband of deceased) was also arrested on 17-12-91 and since then the accused-petitioner No. 4 is also in jail, 9. I have considered the submissions made before me and it will not at all be proper to express any opinion on the merits of this case at this stage, however, in the facts and circumstances of this case, I am inclined to accept this bail application of the accused-petitioners No. 1 to 4 under section 439. Cr. PC. 10. It is, therefore, ordered that accused-petitioners (1) Shakuntala Devi Widow of Shri Shiv Shankar Sharma, (2) Bina Sharma W/o Shri Satish Sharma, (3) Satish Sharma S/o Shri Shiv Shanker Sharma & (4) Vishnu Sharma S/o Shri Shiv Shanker Sharma be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of Rs. 5,000 (Five Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court to appear before it as and when called upon to do so during the pendency of the trial against them.Bail granted. *******