Bombay High Court
Bhiva S/O Vithal Dhutraj And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 22 August, 2016
Bench: A.I.S. Cheema
cria259.03
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.259 OF 2003
1) Bhiwa s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-93 years, Occu:Agriculture,
2) Sidhodhan s/o Bhiwa Dhutraj,
Age-21 years, Occu:Education,
3) Chandramani s/o Bhiwa Dhutraj,
Age-25 years, Occu:Agriculture,
All R/o-Pimpran, Tq-Purna,
Dist-Parbhani.
...APPELLANTS
(Orig. Accused)
VERSUS
1) State of Maharashtra,
2) Vithal s/o Kisanrao Dhutraj,
Age-39 years, Occu:Agriculture,
3) Narayan s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-54 years, Occu:Agriculture,
4) Dagdu s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-60 years, Occu:Agriculture,
All R/o-Pimpran, Tq-Purna,
Dist-Parbhani.
...RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 23/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2016 00:36:20 :::
cria259.03
2
...
Mr.Vijay Sharma Advocate for Appellants.
Mr.R.B. Bagul, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mr.M.P. Kale Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3965 OF 2016
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.259 OF 2003
1) Bhiva s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-86 years, Occu:Agriculture,
2) Siddhodan s/o Bhiva Dhutraj,
Age-34 years, Occu:Agriculture,
3) Chandramani s/o Bhiva Dhutraj,
Age-38 years, Occu:Agriculture,
All R/o-Pimpran, Tq-Purna,
Dist-Parbhani.
...APPLICANTS
(Orig. Accused)
VERSUS
1) State of Maharashtra,
2) Vithal s/o Kisanrao Dhutraj,
Age-52 years, Occu:Agriculture,
3) Narayan s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-67 years, Occu:Agriculture,
4) Dagdu s/o Vithal Dhutraj,
Age-73 years, Occu:Agriculture,
::: Uploaded on - 23/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 24/08/2016 00:36:20 :::
cria259.03
3
All R/o-Pimpran, Tq-Purna,
Dist-Parbhani.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.Vijay Sharma Advocate for Applicants.
Mr.R.B. Bagul, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mr.M.P. Kale Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
...
CORAM: A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.
DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. The Appellants - original accused No.1 -
under Section 325 and accused Nos. 3 and 4 under
Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 were
convicted in Sessions Trial No.176 of 1999 by
Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani on 7th
March 2003. They were convicted under the above
Sections for having committed offence against
original complainant Dagdu Vithal Dhutraj and in
the course of incident also causing injuries to
Vithal Kisanrao Dhutraj and Narayan Vithal
Dhutraj (Respondent Nos. 2 to 4). Being aggrieved,
cria259.03
present Appeal was filed and the same has been
admitted.
2. When the matter has come up for hearing,
the parties have filed Criminal Application
No.3965 of 2016 and it is stated that the parties
are related to each other. They are step brothers
i.e. they have same father but are born from
different mothers. It is stated that they have
buried their differences and have decided to live
peacefully and thus do not want to pursue the
dispute further.
3. Criminal Application for compounding
offence was sent for verification to the Registrar
(Judicial) and Registrar (Judicial) has given a
detail report which is endorsed by the accused
persons as well as the complainant and injured
persons with their thumb impression and
signatures. The accused persons have been
identified by Advocate Shri Vijay Sharma.
cria259.03
Complainant and injured persons have been
identified by Advocate Shri Kale before the
Registrar (Judicial). The accused are present and
in the Court also Advocate Shri Vijay Sharma
identifies them and Advocate Shri Kale identifies
the injured persons and complainant as present in
the Court. On being asked, the complainant and
both the injured persons as well as the accused
persons admitted the contents of the Application
which has been filed for compounding the offence
and that they have compounded the offence. The
complainant and two injured persons state that
the accused persons may be released from the
offence as they do not want to pursue the matter
further. The accused persons also admitted the
compromise.
4. Report dated 9th August 2016 submitted by
the Registrar (Judicial) is taken on record and
accepted. Criminal Application No.3965 of 2016 is
allowed. The compounding of offences is accepted
cria259.03
under Section 320 read with Section 482 of the
Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973. In interest
of Justice, it is necessary to permit compounding
and set aside the impugned Judgment. The impugned
Judgment is thus quashed and set aside. The
Appellants - accused persons are hereby acquitted
of the offence punishable under Sections 324 and
325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with which they
were charged. Their bail bonds are cancelled. Fine
if paid, be refunded to them.
5. Criminal Appeal No.259 of 2003 and
Criminal Application No.3965 of 2016 stand
disposed of, accordingly.
[A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.]
asb/AUG16
