The High Court refused leave to file a criminal appeal against a Sessions Court order acquitting the accused, holding that the dispute concerned premises and grudge rather than caste-based abuse.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1111 OF 2004
The State of Maharashtra
..... Appellant.
V/s
Suresh Dattatraya Mohol Age 44 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Mutha, Tal. Mulshi, District Pune. ----Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa, App for appellant - State.
..... Respondent.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 10th October, 2007.
ORAL JUDGMENT:
2
3
since the complainant in his evidence had given different version about what was actually said on the date of the incident. The Trial Court also observed that the other witness was related to the complainant and his testimony was also not considered to be reliable on number of counts. The Court also held that the delay in filing complaint was not explained.
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant can file a criminal appeal under sight of s. 376 CrPC against the acquittal of the respondent
Whether there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the accused abused the complainant on the basis of his caste
3 provisions across 3 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Suresh Dattatraya Mohol
V.M. KANADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
