Dismissed

The State of Mah v. Subhash Govindrao Jondhale and Ors.

Bombay HC13 Sept 2012APPLN/3495/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The State filed appeals against convictions. The High Court held that no merit existed in the appeals due to deficiencies in witness testimony regarding individual accused roles and unexplained weapon recoveries. Consequently, the court deemed no notice necessary and dismissed both the appeals.

What did the court decide?

Applications for condonation of delay and leave to appeal are dismissed; appeal merits rejected; no notice issued.

The State of Mah Vs Subhash Govindrao Jondhale… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

Cri.Appln.No.3495/2012

¶2

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3495 OF 2012 WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3497 OF 2012

¶6

The State of Maharashtra ...APPLICANT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Subhash s/o Govindrao Jondhale
and others

¶9

...RESPONDENTS

¶10

.....

¶11

Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A.P.P. for applicant/State

¶12

.....

¶13

DATED: 13th September, 2012

¶14

O R D E R:

¶15

1.Heard.

¶16

2.The accused were charged for offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 395, 397, 452, 323,
504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal
Code.

¶17

3.Perused the impugned judgment and read the
copies of notes of evidence.

¶18

Cri.Appln.No.3495/2012

¶19

¶20

4.It is seen that, actual identification with

¶21

the involvement of each accused and actual role played
by them is not narrated by the witnesses. The weapons
and other articles constituting evidence were not
recovered. The fact of injuries in isolation does not
specifically prove use of weapons by particular accused.

¶22

5.It is obvious that the view taken by trial
Court is only permissible view. In the result, appeal
has no merits.

¶23

6.In the background that the appeal has no
merit, we do not find it to be a fit case for issuance
of notice on Criminal Application for condonation of
delay.

¶24

7.The application for condonation of delay and
application for leave to appeal both are dismissed.

¶25

fmp/cri3495.12

The State of Mah v. Subhash Govindrao Jondhale and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Mah v. Subhash Govindrao Jondhale 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

Case details

Similar cases

Shrimant Rangnath Gavhane and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shaikh Baban Biban Shaikh and Anr. Vs the State of Mah Thr. Shevgaon Police Station

Syed Faisal Pasha Syed Farook Pasha Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Prakash Balaprasad Ajmera Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Mohan Uttamrao Chavan Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Praitamkumar Sampatrao Shegaonkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.