Dalveer Bhandari ( 1 ) THIS bail application has been filed on behalf of Mrs. Vijay Laxmi appellant no. 1 (wife of Jagat Narain appellant No. 2) and Jagat Narain-appellant No. 2. ( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants has pointed out that there are four dying declarations in this case. Two dying declarations were made by the deceased before the doctor. In both the dying declarations, there is no reference of both the appellants, namely Mrs. Vijay Laxmi and Jagat Narain. ( 3 ) MR. Thakur further submitted that even in the dying declaration made before the Investigating Officer, name of Mrs. Vijay Laxmi is also not mentioned. In the said dying declaration it is mentioned that Jagat Prasad was seen by deceased, during the incident. In the dying declaration made by deceased before the Executive Magistrate names of Mrs. Vijay Laxmi and Jagat Narain have been mentioned. The deceased further stated that she could see only a man with pajama, who had poured kerosene oil on her. She further stated that only Raj kishan had worn Pajama. Prima facie we find inconsistency In these various dying declarations made by the deceased. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel has placed on record the Judgment of Kamla v. State of punjab, 1993 SCC (Crl.) 1, in support of his case, wherein the Court observed that if a dying declaration is found to be voluntary, reliable and made in fit mental contention, then the same can be relied upon without corroboration. The state ment should be consistent, throughout, if the deceased has several opportunities of making dying declaration, that is to say, if there are more than one dying declaration, they should be consistent. ( 5 ) ON consideration of totality and facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to suspend the sentence of appellants, i. e. Smt. Vijay Laxmi, w/o. Jagat Narian and Jagat Narain, s/o. Madhu Dass, during the pendency of the appeal on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- and one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trail court in FIR No. 654/85 under Sections 302/498-A/34, IPC registered at P. S. Kotwali, New Delhi. . 10,000/- and one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trail court in FIR No. 654/85 under Sections 302/498-A/34, IPC registered at P. S. Kotwali, New Delhi. . , ( 6 ) WE make it clear that observations which we have made are only for disposal of this application and would not prejudice the rights of the parties, at the time of hearing in appeal. This application is accordingly disposed of. Dasti.