N.J. Jamadar ORDER
N.J. Jamadar, J.
1. This is an application to enlarge the applicant on bail in CR No. 590 of 2021, registered with Indapur Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 342 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("the Penal Code").
2. The prosecution case runs as under:
Shivraj Hegde (the deceased) was a resident of Nimgaon Ketki, Taluka Indiapur. Prior to two to three years of the occurrence, the deceased had sold his agricultural land admeasuring 2 Acre 20 Are to the applicant-accused no. 2. It was agreed that the deceased would repay the amount and thereupon the applicant would execute re-conveyance in favour of the deceased. The applicant allegedly reneged from the said promise. Navnath Raut, the co-accused, also had a grudge against the deceased as the co-accused had solemnized marriage with the former wife of the deceased, after she obtained divorce from the deceased. The prosecution alleges, the relationship between the deceased and the applicant was strained on the aforesaid count.
3. On 7th June, 2021, while the deceased was filling petrol in his motorcycle at Yashraj Petrol Pump, the applicant and co-accused Navnath accosted him and on the point of a pistol forced him to board a four-wheeler. The deceased was taken to an unknown place. He was confined in a room. The applicant allegedly asserted that the deceased still owed certain amount to him.
4. On 20th June, 2021, at about 6.00 am. the applicant and co-accused Navnath brought the deceased at a place known as Junction Forest, Indapur. The applicant and co-accused poured petrol on the person of the deceased and set him on fire, and fed away. The deceased claimed to have extinguished the fire by rolling himself on the ground, and, with the assistance of the passers by, called his father thereat. He was shifted to Civil Hospital, Solapur. A statement of the deceased was recorded by the Police Inspector, Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur, in the presence of the Medical Officer. Another statement of the deceased was recorded by the Magistrate. The deceased eventually succumbed to the injuries. The aforesaid statements were treated as dying declarations.
5. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, crime was registered. Investigation commenced. The applicant and co-accused came to be arrested.
6. The applicant has preferred this application for bail on the ground that the allegations of the applicant and co-accused of having abducted the deceased were found to be false by the investigation agency. In fact, a major part of the statement of the deceased was found untrue. The case set up by the prosecution on the basis of the alleged dying declaration is inherently improbable. There is no prima facie material to connect the applicant with the crime. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
7. I have heard Mr. Mundargi, the learned Senior Counsel for the applicant and Ms. Dabholkar, the learned APP for the State. I have also perused the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the documents annexed with it.
8. Mr. Mundargi submitted that from the own-showing of the investigating agency, more than eighty percent of the deceased's version was found untrue. The investigation revealed that the deceased was not kidnapped, as claimed. In fact, the deceased worked at different places during the said period, as a free man. The deceased had also called his cousin and got money transferred in his account through UPI. ........