This-Court dismissed a criminal appeal challenging an acquittal under Sections 452, 392, 307, 427 IPC due to lack of material for granting leave against certain accused.
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 )
crap408.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 408 OF 2016 WITH APEAL/364/2016
ASHOK @ BALASAHEB S/O ABASAHEB GALDHAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Mr.N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr.R.V. Dasalkar, APP for respondent/State.
Mr.M.S. Karad h/f. Mr.S.S. Thombre, Advocate for
respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :15.12.2017
P.C. :-
1.This proceeding is filed to challenge the
decision of acquittal given by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Majalgaon, Dist. Beed in Sessions Case
No.37 of 2013 in favour of original accused Nos.1,4 & 5.
They are acquitted from offence punishable under sections
452, 392, 307, 427 read with section 149 of the Indian
Penal Code.
2.Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, who is
original complainant.
3.It appears that no separate leave is sought, but
learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that this
proceeding may be treated as the proceeding for grant of
leave and the Court may hear for admission purpose also.
4.This Court has carefully gone through the
evidence. This Court has also gone through the injury
certificate in respect of two injured persons including
the first informant.
5.There are some disputes between accused Nos.1 to
3 on one side and the first information on other side.
The first informant was running one hotel and in the
vicinity of the hotel, there was brick-kiln of accused
No.3. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are sons of accused No.1. One
litigation was also started by the first informant to
stop the activity of brick-kiln in the vicinity of his
hotel, as the brick-kiln was creating nuisance to his
hotel. The allegations are made that the incident dated
01.06.2012 took place due to his said dispute. The
allegations are made that accused persons, five in
numbers, entered in the hotel with weapons like sword,
iron-bar and stone and they assaulted the first
information and his brother by using these weapons. The
brother of the first informant sustained fracture injury
to his head, which is described as grievous injury. The
( 3 ) crap408.16
first informant sustained some simple injuries like CLW,
but there was fracture of little finger, proximal
phalanx. The allegations as against accused Nos.1 and 5
were vague that they had assaulted together by using
iron-bar and stone and there was allegation against
Laxman that he was instigating other. It is contended
that accused Nos.4 and 5 are relatives of accused No.1.
6.The Trial Court has considered direct evidence,
medical evidence and also evidence of spot panchanama.
The Trial Court has believed the evidence given as
against accused Nos.2 and 3 - sons of accused No.1 and in
view of the injuries caused to first informant and his
brother, conviction is given even for offence punishable
under section 307 of IPC by the trial Court but by using
section 34 of the IPC.
7.After considering the entire record, this Court
formed opinion that nothing can be achieved by granting
leave to file appeal as against accused Nos.1,4 and 5.
The view taken by the trial Court is a possible view and
there is no material on the basis of which leave can be
granted and appeal as against accused Nos.1,4 and 5 can
be admitted. The State did not prefer to file appeal in
view of the aforesaid circumstance. It is the original
complainant, who has come to this Court.
8.Criminal Appeal No. 408 of 2016 stands
dismissed.
9.List the other appeal for hearing on 29.01.2018.
[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [T.V. NALAWADE,J.]
snk/2017/DEC17/ crap408.16
Ashok @ Balasaheb S/o Abasaheb Galddhar
The State of Maharashtra
T.V. Nalawade
S.M. Gavhane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court