Bombay High Court
Shahadev S/O Vitthal Munde And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 December, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 244/15
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2015
1. Shahadev s/o. Vitthal Munde,
Age 25 years, Occu. Agriculture,
2. Kamalbai w/o. Arjun Munde,
Age 41 years, Occu. Household,
Both R/o. At post Bhawanwadi,
Tq. & Dist. Beed. ....Applicants.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through the A.P.I. Wadwani Police
Station, Tq. Wadwani, District
Beed. ....Respondent.
Mr. R.G. Hange, Advocate for applicants.
Mr. P.G. Borade, APP for respondent/State.
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.
DATED : December 22, 2017.
JUDGMENT :
1) The revision is admitted. Notice after admission
returnable forthwith. The learned APP waives notice. Heard both the
sides for final disposal.
2) The revision is filed to challenge the order made on Exh.
50 in Special Case (POSCO) No. 13/2014 by the learned Judge of
Special Court, Majalgaon appointed under the provisions of
Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act' for
short). The said application was filed by the present petitioners for
Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 244/15
discharge in a case filed against them for the offences punishable
under sections 376, 363, 366-A r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC
for short) and section 3 and 4 of POCSO Act. After considering the
material produced along with the chargesheet, the learned Judge of
the Sessions Court has rejected the application.
3) This Court has carefully gone through the entire material
collected by the police during investigation. The crime was registered
on the basis of report given by father of victim girl. The father had
no knowledge about the incident and he had received information
from others. There was information against the present applicants
that they had helped the main accused, accused No. 1 for taking the
victim girl away from the village. Petitioner No. 2 is mother of main
accused and petitioner No. 1 is from the same village.
4) This Court has gone through the statement of victim girl.
The statement is mainly against accused No. 1 Navnath Munde. In
respect of the incident of that night, night between 22.4.2014 and
23..4.2014, the victim girl has given statement that on that night
Navnath and Pandurang had come to her house and they were
waiting outside of her house on motorcycle and they took her away
from village. The record of medical examination shows that hymen
had the tear. She has not made allegation of sexual intercourse even
Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 244/15
against Navnath. But, there is that circumstance. There is statement
of one Shivram of the same village and he had seen the victim girl in
the company of Navnath. He has vaguely contended that present
petitioners had helped Navnath in the offence. There is no direct
evidence as such against the present petitioners. It can be said that
various statements of the witnesses show that they only learnt that
present petitioners had helped Navnath in commission of offence,
but nobody had seen both the petitioners in the company of either
victim girl or Navnath at the relevant time. Thus, there is virtually no
material for framing charge against the present petitioners. This
Court holds that the Trial Court ought to have allowed the application
and so, interference is warranted in the order made by the Trial
Court. In the result, following order.
ORDER
The revision is allowed. The order made by the learned
Judge of the Sessions Court, Majalgaon on Exh. 50 in Special Child
Case No. 13/2014 is hereby set aside. The application at Exh. 50 is
allowed. Revision petitioners viz. Shahadev s/o. Vitthal Munde and
Kamalbai w/o. Arjun Munde stand discharged.
[T.V. NALAWADE, J.]
ssc/
