Gulab Rayappa Birajdar (Bhosale) ... vs The State Of Maharashtra
2023 Latest Caselaw 1078 Bom

                                                                        921-Cri.Appeal.288 of 2015.odt


                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.288 OF 2015
WITH APEAL/719/2022 WITH APEAL/849/2022 WITH APPLN/3769/2022 IN
              APEAL/719/2022 WITH APEAL/841/2018

               GULAB RAYAPPA BIRAJDAR (BHOSALE) AND OTHERS
                                  VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                            ......
      Mr. Govind Kulkarni, Advocate h/f. Sr. Counsel Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh for
                         Appellants in Cri.Apeal/841/2018.
     Sr. Counsel Mr. V. D. Sapkal for appellant Nos.1 and 8, Mr. N. S. Ghanekar for
         Appellant Nos.2 and 4, Mr. S.S. Thombre for Appellant Nos.6,9 & 10 in
                                   Cri.Apeal/288/2015
           Mr. S.S. Thombre, Advocate for Appellants in Cri.Apeal/849/2022.
        Mr. Nilesh S. Ghanekar, Advocate for Appellants in Cri.Apeal/719/2022.
                         APP for Respondent - State : Mr. A. M. Phule
                                            ......

                                      CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
                                              ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.

                                      DATED        : 1st FEBRUARY 2023

PER COURT :

1. After hearing the learned advocate Mr. Govind Kulkarni holding

for Senior advocate Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh in Criminal Appeal No.841 of

2018, it has been realized that the learned trial Judge has granted

compensation under section 357(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the

legal representative of the deceased as well as the injured. Unfortunately,

though four appeals have been filed, in none of the appeals the injured as well

as the legal representatives of deceased have been made party-respondent.

921-Cri.Appeal.288 of 2015.odt

2. When the appellants are challenging the entire judgment and

order i.e. including the order granting compensation under section 357(1) of

Cr.P.C. the person who would be beneficiary of that order should be party to

the appeal.

3. We wont lay hands on the decision of this Court in Emperor Vs.

Chunilal Bhagwanji, reported in AIR (29) 1942 Bombay 205(1), wherein it has

been held that "where a person, whether the complainant or some one else,

has been awarded compensation under section 545 of the Criminal Procedure

Code, he ought to be served with notice of an appeal or revision application

which may result in the order of compensation being set aside. If he appears, it

will be in the discretion of the Court to hear his advocate or to decline to do

so. But if he is served with notice, he can, at any rate, see that his view is

placed before the Court by the advocate appearing for Government."

4. Here, we would like to say that section 545 is erstwhile section of

the then Cr.P.C. and is present section 357 of Cr.P.C. of 1973.

5. Under such circumstance, we direct all the appellants to make the

injured and the legal representatives of deceased as party respondents. Such

information should be gathered positively on or before 10.02.2023 and such

information be given to this Court on 13.02.2023, thereafter further order in

respect of making them as party and effecting the amendment would be

921-Cri.Appeal.288 of 2015.odt

passed. Notices should be issued to added respondents. Since the appellants

are in jail since 2015, we expect that the concerned persons from the

appellants would act swiftly and bring the necessary information on or before

10.02.2023.

6. Place the matter for further consideration on 13.02.2023.

(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)

Tandale/-