Absence of a dying declaration and completion of investigation justified bail in an alleged fatal-burning case.

The petitioner, accused No. 1 and husband of the deceased, sought bail in Crime No. 62/2026 of Nandagad Police Station.

The prosecution alleged that on 19 April 2026 he set fire to the deceased’s clothing; she sustained severe burn injuries and died on 22 April 2026.

The petitioner argued that the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet had been filed, and no dying declaration had been recorded despite the deceased surviving for several days.

He also relied on the statements of two witnesses, one of whom allegedly identified him as the person who set the deceased on fire, while the other did not speak against him.

The State opposed bail, citing prima facie material and the risk of witness tampering.

1. Whether the petitioner had made out a case for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C./Section 483 BNSS, having regard to the prosecution material and the circumstances of the case.

2. Whether the absence of a dying declaration, completion of the investigation, and the witness statements supported release on bail despite the gravity of the allegation.

The Court considered the petitioner’s bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The alleged offence was identified in the body and final order as one punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

In assessing bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegation, the severity of the possible punishment, the risk of absconding, the petitioner’s character and antecedents, and the possibility of witness tampering.

No precedent was cited.

The Court noted that CW-9’s statement implicated the petitioner, while CW-10’s statement did not attribute domestic violence or other conduct against him.

It also observed that the deceased had survived for several days but no statement or dying declaration from her was on record.

In light of those circumstances, the completed investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and the view that the allegations remained to be established at trial, the Court concluded that the petitioner had made out a case for bail.

The petitioner was directed not to tamper with or threaten prosecution witnesses, to attend court regularly, and not to involve himself in any offence; breach of the conditions may permit the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.