This Criminal Application sought leave to appeal an acquittal under Sections 279, 337 IPC and Sections 119, 177, 134(b), 187 MV Act. The High Court held the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt and allowed the acquittal.
Application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. rejected; leave to appeal denied.
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.
74-als1.17.sxw
ssm 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2017
The State of Maharashtra ….Applicant.
Vs.
Rohan Sharad Pawar ….Respondent.
Ms. V.S. Mhaispurkar, APP for the Applicant-State. None for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 13th MARCH, 2018.
P.C.:-
This is an Application under Section 378 (3) of the Cr.P.C. for leave to file Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 29th June 2016, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 4, Pune in Summary Criminal Case No. 12995 of 2013, thereby acquitting the Respondent from the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 119/177 and 134(b)/187 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.
2 The perusal of record would indicate that the prosecution has failed to establish that, the Respondent was driving the motor cycle in such a manner, which would endanger the life of the public
1/2
ssm 2 74-als1.17.sxw
walking on the street/road and has even failed to correctly mention the manner in which the Respondent was driving the motor cycle and its speed.
3 The evidence on record further indicates that the road, on which the Respondent was allegedly driving the motor cycle, was having sufficient crowd and it was very difficult for him to drive the motor-cycle at a high speed. As noted earlier, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges levelled against the Respondent beyond the reasonable doubt by adducing cogent and sufficient evidence.
4 After perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that, the view adopted by the Trial Court is a reasonable and probable view in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
No case for grant of leave to file Appeal is made out.
5 Application is accordingly rejected.
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether leave to file an appeal under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. should be granted when the trial court acquitted the respondent due to lack of evidence.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Rohan Sharad Pawar
A. S. Gadkari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
