Bombay High Court
State Of Mah.Thr.Pso.P.S.Akot ... vs Ankush Jagdeo Shirsat & Another on 2 December, 2016
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
1 apeal147.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.147/2002
State of Maharashtra, through
PSO P. S. Akot File, Dist. Akola. .....APPELLANT
...V E R S U S...
1. Ankush Jagdeo Shirsat,
aged about 40 years.
2. Santosh Ankush Shirsat,
aged about 19 years,
both r/o Ugwa Village, P.S. Akot File,
Akola, Tq. Dist. Akola. ...RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. A. R. Kulkarni, A.P.P. for appellant.
Mr. C. A. Joshi, Advocate for respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- 02.12.2016
J U D G M E N T
1. By the present appeal, the State is questioning the
correctness of the judgment and order of acquittal passed by
J.M.F.C. Court No.4, Akola dated 28.12.2001 in Summary
Criminal Case No.1960/2001, which was tried as regular criminal
case acquitting the respondents of the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 427 and 506 (2) read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2. Heard Mrs. Kulkarni, learned A.P.P. for the appellant-
State and Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondents.
2 apeal147.02.odt
3. Gokarnabai (PW1) lodged report Exh.-15. According to
the report, on the day of incident i.e. on 31.01.2001, the
respondents-Ankush and Santosh of her village came in front of
her fair price shop when she was distributing the ration quota.
That time, the respondents abused her and also instigated the
persons present there to report Tahsildar for withdrawal of the fair
price shop allotted to the complainant. They also stated that the
report is made against her and used abusive language. Upon that
the complainant asked as to why they are using the abusive words
when she is Sarpancha of the village. Thereafter, both the
respondents threw the gunny bags filled with food grains and has
thus caused damage. That time, Ankush gave a slap on her right
cheek. That time, Sanjay (PW3) and one Raju Wagh intervened.
4. The learned trial Court acquitted the respondents since
he noticed various contradictions in the evidence of the
complainant and her son Sanjay. According to the FIR and the
evidence, accused no.1-Ankush gave a slap on the cheek of
Gokarnabai. However, as per the evidence of Sanjay, who was
also present on the spot, it is the accused no.2-Santosh who gave a
3 apeal147.02.odt
slap to his mother. However, in the cross-examination, he states
that accused no.2-Santosh did not assault his mother.
5. When a specific suggestion was given to Gokarnabai
(PW1) that accused no.1 contested the Gram Panchayat election
against her, she stoutly denied the same. However, Sanjay (PW3)
states that, "In the recent Gram Panchayat election, accused no.1
has contested the election against my mother." Thus, it is crystal
clear that the prosecution witnesses are having scant respect to the
truth and it appears that FIR is actuated out of the political rivalry.
6. One Pandurang Sardar whose name is mentioned in the
FIR has failed to support the prosecution and nothing could be
brought on record by the learned A.P.P.
From the quality of the aforesaid evidence available on
record, I am of the view that no error is committed by the learned
trial Court while acquitting the respondents.
In view of above, the appeal is dismissed.
JUDGE
kahale
