Laxman Hari Patil (Waghmare) vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 4405 Bom

            Digitally signed
            by LAXMIKANT
LAXMIKANT   GOPAL
GOPAL       CHANDAN
CHANDAN     Date:
            2022.04.27
            15:35:10 +0530
                                                                               (907) IA-2719.21.odt




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                               CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2719 OF 2021
                                                   IN
                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.195 OF 2021

                 Laxman Hari Patil (Waghmare)                       : Applicant/Appellant.
                       Versus
                 The State of Maharashtra                           : Respondent.

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi for the Applicant/Appellant.

Mr. Y M Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent/State.

                                           CORAM :    S. S. SHINDE,
                                                      SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ
                                           DATE   :   26th April 2022
                 P.C.

                 1             This is an application filed by the Applicant/Appellant for

suspension of sentence imposed upon him and for enlarging him on bail during

pendency of the Appeal.

2 The Applicant/Appellant is convicted vide judgment and order

dated 29/12/2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1,

Islampur for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal

Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

3 Heard Mr. Satyavrat Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the

Applicant/Appellant. He submits that the incident in question has not

happened at all and the Applicant/Appellant has been falsely implicated in the

lgc 1 of 3 (907) IA-2719.21.odt

crime. He invites attention of this Court to the evidence of PW-5 Kagabai Hari

Patil Waghmare, and submits that the said evidence suffers from omissions

inasmuch as though she stated in examination in chief that, the

Applicant/Appellant was sitting on the person of Hari Patil (now deceased),

however, the said portion has come by omission. In supports of the said

contention, he invites attention of this Court to the cross examination of PW-5.

He also invites attention of this Court to the medical evidence of Dr. Nikhil

Subhash Jagtap (PW-6) and submits that, the nature of injuries described by

the medical officer is simple. He further submits that, deceased Hari Patil was

suffering from ailments as it is evident from the evidence of PW-5. He,

therefore, submits that the substantive sentence of the Applicant/Appellant

may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail during pendency of the

Appeal.

4 On the other hand, the learned APP appearing for the

Respondent/State invites attention of this Court to the evidence of PW-5, so

also evidence of PW-3 and medical evidence and submits that, the evidence of

these witnesses coupled with other evidence brought on record by the

prosecution clearly indicate that the Applicant/Appellant was the assailant and

killed his real father. He, therefore, opposed this application.

5            Upon appreciation of the rival contentions and upon careful


lgc                                                                          2 of 3
                                                                (907) IA-2719.21.odt

perusal of the evidence of PW-5 so also PW-3 and medical evidence, we are of

the opinion that the findings recorded by the Trial Court are in consonance

with the evidence brought on record. Upon careful perusal of evidence of PW-

5, it is transpired that she has in detail stated the manner in which the incident

had happened. Even if the contention of Mr. Satyavrat Joshi, learned counsel

for the Applicant/Appellant is accepted that, the part of deposition of PW-5

that the Applicant/Appellant was sitting on the person of deceased Hari Patil,

is excluded from consideration, even in that case her evidence is reliable and

inspires confidence. It is not necessary to elaborate the reasons since the

appeal filed by the Applicant/Appellant is pending for consideration. Suffice it

to say that, there is sufficient evidence brought on record by the prosecution

which would clearly indicate the involvement of the Applicant/Appellant. No

case is made out to entertain the Interim Application. Hence the Interim

Application stands rejected.

6 Needless to say that the observations made herein above are prima

facie in nature and confined to the adjudication of the present Application.

Hearing of the Appeal is expedited. Registry to include the appeal in weekly

final hearing list as per its chronology commencing in the month of July 2022.

[SARANG V. KOTWAL, J]                                     [S. S. SHINDE , J]




lgc                                                                            3 of 3