Allowed

The State of Mah Thr Pp v. Santosh Magan Jadhav and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Nov 2011APPLN/1768/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal application, the State sought leave to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2010 for offences u/s 498-A and 306 IPC. The Court, noting the dying declaration, allowed the application, granted leave to appeal, and treated the present application as the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Leave to file appeal is granted; the present application is treated as the appeal; the application is admitted.

The State of Mah Thr Pp Vs Santosh Magan Jadhav and Ors. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

crap1768.11

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1768 OF 2011

¶5

The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant

¶6

[Orig.Complainant]

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Santosh Magan Jadhav and others ...Respondents [Orig.Accused]

¶9

Shri S.G.Nandedkar, A.P.P. for the applicant/State Shri R.M. Deshmukh, advocate for respondent

¶10

CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J.

¶11

DATED : 22nd November, 2011

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

1 Heard learned respective counsel for the parties.

¶14

2 This is an application preferred by the applicant/State

¶15

¶16

crap1768.11

¶17

(original complainant), seeking leave to file appeal, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19.1.2011, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Jalna, in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2010, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

3 I have perused the impugned judgment, dated 19.1.2011 and the record and proceedings with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

4 It appears that, to substantiate the charges levelled against the respondents, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses.

¶20

5 Considering the written dying declaration Exh.49 and also considering the oral dying declaration made by victim Deokabai before her mother PW3 Sitabai Sulane, it appears that the matter requires reconsideration.

¶21

6 Hence, present application is allowed. Leave to file appeal is granted. Present application be treated as appeal.

¶22

7 Admit.

¶23

¶24

crap1768.11

¶25

8 Shri R.M.Deshmukh, learned counsel accepts service of notice for respondent nos. 1 to 4, after admission.

¶26

9 The respondents to furnish same bail, but fresh bonds before the trial court within a period of four weeks from today.

¶27

10 R. and P. be sent back to the concerned court.

¶28

(SHRIHARI P. DAVARE),

¶29

JUDGE.

¶30

dbm/crap1768.11

The State of Mah Thr Pp v. Santosh Magan Jadhav and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Mah Thr Pp v. Santosh Magan Jadhav and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasant Janku Mane and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Chhabildas Chaudhari and Anr. Vs the State of Mah

The State of Mah Thr. Pp Vs Kundan Desraj Agrawal

The State of Mah Vs Ramesh Rangnathrao Sonwane

The State of Maharashtra Vs Yashwant Digambar Shinde and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Dipak Suklal Netke