Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Shatrughna @ Dadarao Rangnath Sathe and Ors.

Bombay HC13 Dec 2016APPLN/1456/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application for leave to appeal was allowed. High Court held that the case necessitates further scrutiny and re-appreciation of evidence. Appeal was admitted and admitted service of juniors.

What did the court decide?

Application seeking leave to appeal allowed; appeal admitted; service waived; matter directed to be taken up under Section 390 CrPC.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Shatrughna @ Dadarao… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1456.2015Cri.Appln..odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1456 OF 2015

¶5

The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Chakur,
Tq.Chakur, Dist. Latur. APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1. Shatrughna @ Dadarao Rangnath Sathe, Age 40 years, Occu. Agri.,

¶8

2. Birbal @ Ishwar Shatrughna @ Dadarao Sathe, Age 20 yers, Occu.Agri.

¶9

3. Sahebrao Rangnath Sathe, Age 38 years, Occu. Agri.

¶10

4. Sow. Antyabai w/o. Shatrughna @ Dadarao Sathe, Age 40 years, Occu. Household and Agri.

¶11

5. Vijaykumar s/o. Baliram Tivghale, Age 39 years, Occu. Agri.

¶12

6. Baliram s/o. Bhanudas Muthe, Age 45 years, Occu. Agri.,

¶13

All R/o. Tivghal, Tq. Chakur,
Dist. Latur. RESPONDENTS

¶14

...

¶15

Mr.S.G.Karlekar, APP for the applicant –
State

¶16

Mr.S.S.Thombre, Advocate for respondent nos.
1 to 6.

¶17

...

¶18

1456.2015Cri.Appln..odt

¶19

¶20

CORAM: S.S.SHINDE &

¶21

V.K.JADHAV,JJ.

¶22

Date: 13.12.2016

¶23

PER COURT:

¶24

1.Heard the learned APP appearing for

¶25

the applicant – State and the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents.

¶26

2.The learned APP appearing for the
applicant–State invites our attention to the
deposition of the eye witnesses and also the
medical evidence and submits that the trial
Court has not properly appreciated the
evidence of the eye witnesses.

¶27

3.On the other hand, the learned

¶28

counsel appearing for the respondents submits

¶29

that the trial Court, upon appreciation of

¶30

the evidence of the eye witnesses, found that

¶31

the said suffers from inherent contradictions

¶32

and improvements, and therefore, the evidence

¶33

of the eye witnesses have been discarded. He

¶34

further submits that once the substantial

¶35

1456.2015Cri.Appln..odt

¶36

¶37

evidence is discarded, though the medical
evidence records finding of the homicidal
death, in absence of substantive piece of
evidence, the prosecution case cannot stand
and the trial Court has rightly extended the
benefit of doubt to the respondents.

¶38

4.Upon hearing the learned APP

¶39

appearing for the applicant – State and the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents

¶40

and upon perusal of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and in particular informant, who is injured, coupled with the medical evidence, we are of the prima facie opinion that the case in hand needs further scrutiny and re-appreciation of the evidence. Hence, the case is established for admission

¶41

of the Appeal, allowing the application
seeking leave to appeal.

¶42

5.Accordingly, the application seeking
leave to appeal is allowed.

¶43

1456.2015Cri.Appln..odt

¶44

¶45

6.Appealadmit.Onadmission,
Mr.S.S.Thombre, Advocate waives service on
behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 6.
7.Action under Section 390 of Criminal
Procedure Code to follow against the
respondents before the Sessions Court, Latur.

¶46

 [V.K.JADHAV] [S.S.SHINDE]
 JUDGE JUDGE

¶47

DDC

The State of Maharashtra v. Shatrughna @ Dadarao Rangnath Sathe and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Shatrughna @ Dadarao Rangnath Sathe 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

The State of Maharashtra Vs Baburao Shrimant Patil and Others

Bhaiya S/O Sahebrao Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sudhakar S/O. Pandit Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhukar Ramrao Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Babasaheb S/O Ginyandevsanap and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vimalbai Balkisan Gikwd and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra