The State Of Maharashtra,Thr.Pso ... vs Shivdas S/O Baliram Dahat & 5 ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4101 Bom

        apeal207.00                              1




                                                                                     
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                             
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                           CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.207 OF 2000.




                                                            
       APPELLANT:                  The State of Maharashtra,
                                   through P.S.O.Arvi.




                                             
                                                : VERSUS :
                             
       RESPONDENTS: 1.  Shivdas s/o Baliram Dahat,
                        aged about 47 years,
                            
                                  2. Devidas s/o Baliram Dahat,
                                     aged about 45 years,

                                  3. Ravindra s/o Devidas Dahat,
      


                                     aged about 18 years,
   



                                  4. Punjab s/o Sukhadeo Dhone,
                                     aged about 47 years,





                                  5. Bhimrao s/o Baliram Dahat,
                                     aged about 28 years,

                                  6. Virendra Sadhu s/o Shivdas Dahat,
                                     aged about 21 years.





                                   All resident of Antardoh,P.S.arvi,
                                   Tq.Arvi, Distt.Wardha.

       -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
       Mr.N.B.Jawade, Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State.
       Mr.R.M.Daga, Advocate for the respondents.
       =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-




    ::: Uploaded on - 26/07/2016                             ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:16:41 :::
         apeal207.00                           2




                                                                              
                                      CORAM:     V.M.DESHPANDE, J.

                                             DATE:     25th JULY, 2016.


       ORAL JUDGMENT :




                                                     

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and

order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Wardha, dated 22nd of February, 2000 in Sessions Case No.16 of

1995, for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307,

326, 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. I have heard Shri N.B.Jawade, the learned Additional

Public Prosecutor for the State and Shri R.M.Daga, learned

counsel for the respondents/accused.

3. The First Information Report is lodged by PW 12

Mahadeo Dhone. According to the First Information Report, on

the day of the incident i.e. on 8th of June, 1994 he came to Arvi at

about 10 hrs. in the morning. For whole day, he stayed at Arvi

and in the evening he started from Arvi to village Antardoh.

When he reached to the village, that time, he noticed that a

quarrel was going on between Vilas Dahat and Harishchandra

Mate in front of a pan stall of Vilas Dahat. He and Pandharinath

Selokar, who was accompanying him, parked the scooter and

Pandharinath went ahead to separate their quarrel. That time,

respondent Shivdas Dahat and Vilas Dahat caught hold him and

respondent no.5 Bhimrao Dahat and respondent no.6 Sadhu Dahat

assaulted him by means of knife. According to the First

Information Report, he was assaulted on account of Gram

panchayat elections.

4. Admittedly, in the present case, prior to lodging of the

First Information Report in question i.e. FIR No.147 of 1994, for

the same incident, FIR No.146 of 1994 was registered by Bhimrao

Dahat, the respondent no.5 in the present appeal, against the first

informant in the present case and others prosecution witnesses.

5. All the prosecution witnesses in the present case have

admitted that the case was registered against them for the same

incident and it was tried in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (F.C.),

Arvi.

6. From the record of the present case it appears that

prosecution witnesses have suffered injuries on their persons.

Their respective injury certificates are duly proved. The question

that is posed before this Court is whether the prosecution has

suppressed the genesis of the incident as argued by the learned

counsel for the respondents herein.

7. Admittedly, on the same incident two reports were filed.

Admittedly, the report lodged by respondent no.5 is first in time.

The said case was registered as RCC No.3 of 1995 and the learned

Magistrate has acquitted all the accused in that case i.e. the first

informant and other prosecution witnesses in the present appeal,

on the ground of pendency of the Sessions Case i.e. the present

criminal case, before the competent Court.

8. Investigating Officer is Mainuddin Imam Naikwade (PW

23). He has also admitted in his evidence about the registration of

two separate FIRs for the same incident. It is admitted by him

that the present respondent nos.5 and 6 were referred to the

General Hospital, Wardha. However, he has admitted that he did

not mention the injuries suffered by these respondents in the

present case. The law on the said issue is well settled as ruled in

the case of Lakshmi Singh and ors. ..vs.. State of Bihar reported

in AIR 1976 SC 2263. According to the Investigating Officer

himself, respondent Virendra Dahat and Bhimrao Dahat were

referred to General Hospital Wardha. It shows that they must be

having some injuries on their persons and therefore Investigating

Officer was required to refer them to the hospital. What was the

nature of their injuries ? Whether they were simple or grievous ?,

it was for the prosecution to state about the nature of those

injuries appearing on the person of the present respondents. It is

to be noted here that though these two persons were referred to

the General Hospital at Wardha, none of the prosecution witnesses

referred to their injuries.

9. In the present case, it is admitted position that prior to

the incident elections of Gram Panchayat took place. In the village

there are two groups; one group is known as Dahat group whereas

another group is known as Dhone group.

In the said Gram Panchayat election, the group led by

Dahat was declared successful. All the respondents in the present

appeal are belonging to Dahat group whereas the first informant

and the injured witnesses are belonging to Dhone group. Further,

the other witnesses who are examined are also belonging to

Dhone group and they or their kins were defeated in the election

by the persons contesting from Dahat group.

10. From the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, it is

brought on record that about 100 persons were assembled on the

spot as could be noticed from the evidence of Daulat (PW 4).

However, none of the independent witnesses are examined and all

the witnesses who are examined in the case are either contesting

election from Dhone group by themselves or by their kins.

11. Further, the evidence of the witnesses shows that their

evidence suffers from the improvements and also contradictions.

12. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor was unable to

point out any perversity in the impugned judgment. He was

unable to point out that the view taken by the Court below is not

permissible on the basis of the available evidence on record.

13. Non-explanation of the injuries received by the

respondents/accused persons at the time of occurrence or in the

course of altercation is a very important circumstance from which

the Court is permitted to draw the inference in view of the law

laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lakshmi

Singh's case (cited supra). Non-explanation of the injuries and not

placing of the reports of the injuries suffered by the respondents

casts serious doubt about the truthfulness of the entire prosecution

case, especially when it is established by clinching evidence on

record that the respondents are belonging to Dahat group who

were successful in the Gram panchayat election and they also

suffered injuries on their persons.

14. As no perversity is noticed in the impugned judgment, I

pass the following order.

- ORDER -

The appeal is dismissed.

JUDGE

chute

CERTIFICATE

I certify that this order/judgment

uploaded is true and correct copy of original signed order/judgment.

Uploaded by : P.Z.Chute.

Uploaded on: 26/7/2016.