State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Chandrapur vs Balkrishna Mahadeorao Meshram ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 2497 Bom

APEAL 547/03                                        1                          Judgment


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 547/2003 
State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Ramnagar, Dist. Chandrapur.                                                      APPELLANT

                                    .....VERSUS.....

1.       Balkrushna S/o Mahadeorao Meshram,
         aged about 51 years, Occ:-Service,
         R/o Qt. B-19, Raiyyatwadi Colony,
         Tah. & Distt. Chandrapur.

2.       Deepak S/o Shankarlal Jaiswal,
         aged about 41 years, Occ: Worker,
         R/o Bajaj Ward, Gokul Lone,
         Tah. And Distt. Chandrapur,                                    RESPONDE
                                                                                 NTS

         Shri A.R. Chutke, Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant.
                    Shri P.P. Patil, counsel for the respondents.



                                                   CORAM : N.W. SAMBRE, J. 

                                                   DATE   :   11  TH   MAY ,    2017. 

ORAL JUDGMENT   

The Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandrapur in

Regular Criminal Case No.50 of 2000 vide judgment and order dated May

30, 2003 acquitted all the accused persons for an offence punishable

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 354, 295, 506, 509 of the Indian

Penal Code. As such, present appeal against the original accused nos.1

and 2.

APEAL 547/03 2 Judgment

2. The prosecution case as appears from the record is

complainant Shabnam was the tenant of accused Balkrushna and

their existed a dispute as regards the payment of rent. As an

outcome of which, on January 10, 2000, at about 10.00 a.m., the

accused persons tried to dispossess complainant Shabnam of the

property in question by committing an offence in question.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while

questioning the judgment of acquittal would urge that the Court

below has failed to appreciate the evidence of P.W.2-Madhukar,

P.W.7-Shabnam and P.W.8-Mushtaq Khan. According to him, upon

re-appreciation, the judgment of acquittal needs to be reversed.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-

accused would urge that out of the total witnesses examined by the

prosecution, majority of them have turned hostile. He would then

urge that neither the seizure nor the substantial piece of evidence

collected during the investigation could be proved as the

Investigating Officer was not examined and the panch witnesses

have turned hostile. As such, he has prayed for the dismissal of the

appeal.

APEAL 547/03 3 Judgment

5. At the outset, the scope laid down by the Apex Court in

the matter of interference in appeal against acquittal is required to

be appreciated. Once the prosecution has failed to demonstrate the

high degree of perversity, illegality which has resulted in taking a

view which was impossible, only in such circumstances, the

appellate Court is required to interfere.

6. The crystallized view of the Supreme Court is that if the

view taken by the trial Court is a possible view, the appellate Court

should be slow in interfering.

7. In the aforesaid background, I have proceeded to

analyze the evidence as is brought on record by the prosecution side

by examining in all eight witnesses.

8. P.W.1-Subodh before whom, the vehicles were seized

has not supported the case of the prosecution. P.W. 3-Anil Trivedi

has also not supported the case of the prosecution. Same is the case

appears to be with P.W.5-Pramod and P.W.6-Baburao, who are the

panch witnesses.

APEAL 547/03 4 Judgment

9. It is required to be noted that the Investigating Officer,

though repeated chances were given by the learned Magistrate, was

not examined.

10. From the prosecution case, it appears that Exhibit 79

is a report, which was lodged against the accused persons.

Exhibit 81 is the communication issued by the complainant

thereby withdrawing the contents of Exhibit 79. Exhibit 79

depicts that the son of the victim was assaulted, whereas the

said victim was neither examined nor any medical evidence was

brought on record before the Court below. Exhibits 79 and 81,

i.e. the complaint and the withdrawal thereof, speaks of an

existence of civil dispute particularly as regards, the landlord and

tenant as it has come on record that the tenant has failed to clear

the arrears of rent.

11. Apart from above, P.W.2-Madhukar though had

supported the case of the prosecution, as he was deputed to enquire

into the matter, however, there is hardly any material to confirm his

testimony with the other piece of evidence.

APEAL 547/03 5 Judgment

12. P.W.4-Raja Khan, brother of the victim, and P.W.8-

Mushtaq Khan-husband of the victim, have admittedly reached the

spot of incident late in point of time and as such, their testimony

cannot be accepted or at the most could be considered for the

purpose of corroboration.

13. In the aforesaid backdrop, the claim of the appellant

that upon re-appreciation, a case for reversal is made out, does not

hold any substance and is liable to be rejected and as such is

rejected accordingly.

14. As already discussed, the scope of interference in the

appellate jurisdiction in an appeal has statutorily required to be

appreciated. The appeal as such fails and is dismissed.

JUDGE

APTE