Dismissed

State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.I. v. Chhutulal @ Dharmu S/O Nakhu Pache

Bombay HC29 Aug 2012APPA/68/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused leave to the State to appeal an acquittal. The Court held that the trial court correctly found the prosecution evidence untrustworthy due to lack of corroboration regarding specific abusive words and no independent witnesses, finding no perversity in the acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Leave to file appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal is refused.

State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.I. Vs Chhutulal @ Dharmu S/O… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1/5

¶2

2908appa68.12

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.68 OF 2012

¶5

(The State of Maharashtra vs. Chhuttulal @ Dharmu Nakhu Pache) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶6

Shri N.R. Rode, Additional Public Prosecutor for applicant. Shri S. Khandekar, Advocate for respondent.

¶7

CORAM : A.R. JOSHI, J. DATED : AUGUST 29, 2012

¶8

Heard rival arguments on this leave application preferred by the State challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed on 19/8/2011 by the Special Judge and Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia.

¶9

The present respondent/acquitted accused was tried in the special criminal case for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

¶10

2908appa68.12

¶11

2/5

¶12

Atrocities) Act and also for the offence punishable under Section 506 of Indian Penal Code.

¶13

During arguments, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submitted that though the actual words used by the accused are not verbatim reproduced by the main prosecution witnesses – P.W.1 Anusayabai, P.W.2 Lilabai and P.W.3 Shantabai, at least these witnesses mentioned that there were abuses on the caste of the complainant. It is further submitted that the view taken by the learned Special Court mainly based on variance in the substantive evidence of these main prosecution witnesses as to use of actual words imputing aspersions against the accused, is erroneous and rather perverse and required to be interfered with.

¶14

Counter to the above arguments, it is submitted on behalf of respondent that in such type of offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act what is of much importance is the

¶15

2908appa68.12

¶16

3/5

¶17

use of the specific words in any place within public view and as such, there should be corroboration as to exactly which words were allegedly uttered by the accused. It is further submitted that the view taken by the learned Special Court is a possible view considering the different versions given by the prosecution witnesses as to utterance of exact words imputing aspersions against the accused and as such, in the matter of acquittal, the decision of the trial Court should not be lightly interfered with.

¶18

After considering the rival submissions and after going through the reasoning given by the trial Court and after perusing substantive evidence of the main prosecution witnesses – P.W.1 Anusayabai, P.W.2 Lilabai and P.W.3 Shantabai being the first informant, following circumstances emerge and they weighed with the trial Court :

¶19

Firstly, there was no disclosure of exact utterance of words by any of the prosecution witnesses, i.e. P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3. Secondly, P.W.3 complainant had mentioned in her substantive evidence the words, which were not told by her

¶20

2908appa68.12

¶21

4/5

¶22

while lodging the complaint. Thirdly, apart from the interested witnesses, no independent witnesses were examined though were available. Fourthly, where the incident occurred near Budh Vihar, where the complainant and other companion women had been for offering prayer, was on the land of the Government and there was some work of construction/digging of pits in the nearby vicinity going on and that time the alleged incident occurred when the accused came to the spot and abused the women on their caste. Fifthly, there was earlier similar incident in the ninth month of the same year 2006 at the same place. Sixthly, there was previous enmity between the parties and seventhly, there was no corroboration to the incident vis a vis the use of actual words by the accused.

¶23

When all the aforesaid circumstances were noticed by the trial Court and when the trial Court has come to the conclusion that it is difficult to hold the prosecution evidence trustworthy, there cannot be a different view taken by this Court considering the powers to interfere with the

¶24

2908appa68.12

¶25

5/5

¶26

judgment of acquittal.

¶27

In the result, there is no

¶28

perversity/illegality in the reasoning given by the Special Court so as to warrant interference in the judgment and order of acquittal. Hence, here is the case in which leave to file appeal against the said acquittal cannot be granted and accordingly leave to file appeal is refused. Consequently, the matter is disposed of as stands rejected.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

khj

State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.I. v. Chhutulal @ Dharmu S/O Nakhu Pache

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Maharashtra, Thr. P.I. v. Chhutulal @ Dharmu S/O Nakhu Pache

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

Manohar S/O Kondbaji Jadhav Vs Mahadev Bapurao Kale

Mahesh S/O Balaram Neharotra Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its P.S.O.

Sunil S/O Gulabraoji Chafle Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Pso Samudrapur

Pradip Nanduji Patre Vs the State of Maharashtra through Ps Keshori

Sau Khelan W/O Rajkumar Gabhne Vs Suraj S/O Prakash Rangari

Dr Triveni W/O Mahesh Wadnerkar Vs State of Maharashtra Pso Kamptee Police Station Distt Nagpur