Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra v. Vishnu Santu Jamdar and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Feb 2020APEAL/1379/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal, filed by the State of Maharashtra against the acquittal of eleven accused persons for offences under Sections 324, 148, and 149 of the IPC, was dismissed by a single-judge bench. The prosecution counsel candidly submitted that the trial court's view was sustainable, as two views were possible based on the evidence, and accordingly, requested the dismissal of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed. Order passed on 24.2.2020. Appeal abated regarding respondent no. 9.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Vishnu Santu Jamdar and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

213.Apeal1379.03.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1379 OF 2003

¶6

The State of Maharashtra)….Appellant

¶7

(Org.Complainant)

¶8

`V/s.` `1) Vishnu Santu Jamdar`	`)`
`Age about 75 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`2) Rejendra @ Rajaram Vishnu Jamdar` `Age about 27 years, Occ.Service`	`)` `)`
`3) Ashok Vishnu Jamdar`	`)`
`Age about 39 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`4) Subhash Vishnu Jamdar`	`)`
`Age about 36 years, Occ. Service`	`)`
`5) Kiran Bhagwan Waghmare`	`)`
`Age about 26 years, Occ. Education`	`)`
`6) Sarjerao Dadu Patil`	`)`
`Age about 29 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`7) Babaso Shankar Patil`	`)`
`Age about 29 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`8) Ananda Dattu Patil`	`)`
`Age about 25 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`9) Kondiba Chandrappa Patil`	`)`
`Age about 70 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`
`[As per Court’s order dated 4.1.2029`	`)`
`appeal stands abated]`	`)`
`10) Rangrao Yashwant Patil`	`)`
`Age about 31 years, Occ. Agri`	`)`

¶9

¶10

2 / 3 213.Apeal1379.03.doc

¶11

11) Mansing Vishnu Patil)
 Age about 26 years, Occ. Agri)
 All r/o Nerle, Tal. Shahuwadi,)
 Dist. Kolhapur) ....Respondents
(Org.Accused nos.1 to 11)

¶12

Ms.Anamika Malhotra APP for appellant-State.
None for respondents.

¶13

CORAM :K.R.SHRIRAM,J
DATE : 24.2.2020

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

¶15

1.This is an appeal impugning an order and judgment passed

¶16

by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malkapur at Shahuwadi on
18.8.2003 acquitting the respondents (accused) of offences punishable
under Sections 324 (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons
or means), 148 (Rioting, armed with deadly weapon) and 149 (Every
member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in
prosecution of common object) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

¶17

2.Learned APP Ms.Malhotra states that respondent no.9 has
died and therefore, appeal against respondent no.9 is abated.

¶18

3.As regards the other accused, learned APP states that it is
settled law that if two views are possible, the appellate Court should

¶19

¶20

3 / 3 213.Apeal1379.03.doc

¶21

not interfere. Learned APP states that having considered the
impugned judgment and the evidence, the view taken by the trial
Court is a possible view and cannot be faulted with. Therefore, true to
her role as an officer of the Court, learned APP submits that the Court
may dismiss the appeal.

¶22

4. In view of this candid statement of the learned APP which

¶23

is appreciated by the Court, appeal dismissed.

¶24

The State of Maharashtra v. Vishnu Santu Jamdar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Vishnu Santu Jamdar 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

Ahm Marine Llc Vs O.S.V Dolphin Beas and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Madhukar Gulabrao Shelke

Shriram Sahakari Krishi Audyogik Use Todani and Vahatuk Sanstha Ltd. Vs Ashruba Namdeo Golhar and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Shrikrishna Kundlik Waghchavare and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Dhanpal Shivmurthi Koravi and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Vishnu Santu Jamdar and Ors.