Criminal appeal by the State against an acquittal. The High Court held that the Trial Court's view was possible based on the evidence, specifically noting the lack of identification and inconclusive forensic reports, and dismissed the appeal.
Leave to file appeal refused. Criminal application dismissed.
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
ALS 9.13
jpp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2013
The State of Maharashtra.
... Application.
V/s.
Jagdish Dadasaheb Deore (Patil).
... Respondent.
Smt. V.R. Bhonsale, APP for the State.
CORAM: P. V. HARDAS & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
APRIL 22, 2013.
P.C.
By this application the Applicant – State seeks leave to file an Appeal against the Judgment of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Nasik, dated 11th September 2012 in Sessions Case No.170 of 2011 acquitting the Respondent for offence punishable under Sections 397 and 394 of the Indian Penal Code.
2
ALS 9.13
accordingly was lodged in the name of Vijay Deore. It appears that the name of the present Respondent - accused is Jagdish Deore. The Trial Court came to the conclusion that the error in stating the correct name was not a minor aspect of the prosecution case and could not be overlooked. Admittedly, no test identification parade had been held. In fact, PW-6 Sumanbai Deoram had stated that she was unable to identify the accused.
(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (P. V. HARDAS,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal of the respondent despite evidence of a stained knife and an identically named vitim witness.
Whether the trial court's view that the single eyewitness could not identify the accused and the lack of a T.I.P. resulted in no evidence amounts to perversity.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Jagdish Dadasaheb Deore (Patil)
P. V. Hardas
Mridula Bhaktar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
