Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Dipak Lahu Vyadande and Others

Bombay HC4 May 2017APPLN/3012/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay Bench at Aurangabad admitted appeals filed by Satyabhama w/o Dagdu More against a criminal conviction. The High Court found that findings of the trial court were not in consonance with evidence, particularly medical evidence, granting leave to appeal.

What did the court decide?

Both Criminal Applications and appeals were admitted. Service of notice was waived for all respondents.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Dipak Lahu… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

cra3012.16

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3012 OF 2016

¶6

The State of Maharashtra,
Satyabhama w/o Dagdu More,
Age-75 years, Occu:Household,
R/o-Nivali, Tq. & Dist-Latur

¶7

...APPLICANT

¶8

 VERSUS

¶9

1) Dipak Lahu Vyadande,
 Age-20 years,

¶10

2) Tanaji Harischandra Rasal,
 Age-27 years,

¶11

3) Yashpal @ Dada Arun Sirsat,
 Age-20 years,

¶12

All R/o- Niwali, Tq. & Dist-Latur.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

 ...
 Mr.S.Y. Mahajan, A.P.P. for Applicant.
 Mr.S.A. Deshmukh Advocate h/f. Mr. M.S. Patil
 Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶15

...

¶16

WITH

¶17

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.944 OF 2017

¶18

Satyabhama w/o Dagdu More,
Age-76 years, Occu:Household,
R/o-Nivali, Tq. & Dist-Latur

¶19

...APPLICANT

¶20

cra3012.16

¶21

¶22

VERSUS

¶23

1) Dipak Lahu Vyadande, Age-20 years,

¶24

2) Tanaji Harischandra Rasal, Age-27 years,

¶25

3) Yashpal @ Dada Arun Sirsat, Age-20 years,

¶26

All R/o- Niwali, Tq. & Dist-Latur.

¶27

4) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Police Inspector, Police Station, Dhoki, Tq. & Dist-Osmanabad.

¶28

...RESPONDENTS

¶29

 ...
 Mr. T.M. Venjane Advocate for Applicant.
 Mr.S.A. Deshmukh Advocate h/f. Mr. M.S. Patil
 Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
 Mr.S.Y. Mahajan, A.P.P. for Respondent No.4.

¶30

...

¶31

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND

¶32

 K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

¶33

 DATE : 4TH MAY, 2017

¶34

ORDER :

¶35

1. Heard learned A.P.P. appearing for the State

¶36

in Criminal Application No.3012 of 2016 and

¶37

learned counsel appearing for the Applicant in
Criminal Application No.922 of 2017 and learned

¶38

cra3012.16

¶39

¶40

counsel appearing for Respondents - accused.
Perused the notes of evidence and in particular

¶41

medical evidence and also the evidence of
prosecutrix. We have carefully perused the
findings recorded by the trial Court, and prima
facie those findings do not appear to be in
consonance with the evidence brought on record,
and in particular evidence of the medical officer
and the prosecutrix.

¶42

2.In that view of the matter, case is
established for admission of the Appeals, by
allowing these Applications seeking leave to

¶43

appeal. Both the Applications are allowed and the
same stand disposed of, accordingly.

¶44

3.Both the Appeals are Admitted.

¶45

4.On Admission of the Appeals, Mr. S.A.

¶46

Deshmukh Advocate holding for Mr. M.S. Patil

¶47

Advocate waives service for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
The learned A.P.P. waives service for State.

¶48

cra3012.16

¶49

¶50

5.Action under Section 390 of the Code of

¶51

Criminal Procedure to follow against the accused
i.e. Respondent Nos.1 to 3, before the Sessions
Court, Osmanabad.

¶52

[K.K. SONAWANE, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶53

asb/MAY17

The State of Maharashtra v. Dipak Lahu Vyadande and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Dipak Lahu Vyadande and Others

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

Bhanudas Tukaram Kharat Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs S Prabhakar

The Chief Executive Officer Zp Beed Vs Balaji Vithalrao Savalkar and Others

Mr Pralhad Chendiram Shelke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs S Prabhakar

Kiran Chhaganlal Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others