Davdatta Krushnarao Puranik And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 9684 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:27290



                                               1/3                               06-APL-69-23.odt

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.69 OF 2023

                    Devdatta Krushnarao Puranik & Anr.                .... Applicants

                                  versus

                    The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                   .... Respondents
                                                 .......

                    •     Mr. Vikrant Palsikar i/b. Shantanu Deshpande, Advocate for
                          Applicant.
                    •     Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.
                    •     Mr. Om Latpate i/b. Lakshyaved R. Odhekar, Advocate for
                          Respondent No.2.

                                               CORAM     : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

                                               DATE      : 14th SEPTEMBER, 2023

                    P.C. :

1. The Applicants were the original accused Nos.1 and 2

in SCC/252/2018 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Pimpalgaon, District Nashik. The Magistrate vide his Judgment

and Order dated 06/08/2022 acquitted the Applicants. The case

was instituted on a private complaint. After the Applicants were

acquitted, the original complainant i.e. the Respondent No.2

herein filed an Appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge,

Nesarikar

2/3 06-APL-69-23.odt

Niphad, vide Criminal Appeal No.67 of 2022. The Appellate

Court issued notices to the present Applicants vide his order

dated 16/09/2022.

2. Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that the

Appeal before the Sessions Court is not maintainable in view of

the provision of section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. The proper remedy

against the order of acquittal would be to file application for

leave to file Appeal in this Court. Therefore, filing of the Appeal

in the Sessions Court is not supported by law. It is filed with

malafide intentions. Therefore the entire Appeal be quashed.

3. I have considered these submissions. As of today, the

Additional Sessions Judge has issued notice to the Applicants.

Therefore, it is always open for the Applicants to approach that

Court in answer to the notices, by themselves or through their

advocate and point out that Appeal is not maintainable in the

Sessions Court. If and when the Court passes any order against

the Applicant, on maintainability of the approval after that the

3/3 06-APL-69-23.odt

Applicant can approach this Court. At this stage, there is no

reason to assume that the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Niphad, will not look at the provisions of Cr.P.C. In my opinion,

the present application is premature. The Applicants are at

liberty to approach the Additional Sessions Judge, Niphad,

through their advocate and point out their objection about the

maintainability of the said Appeal. In case that issue is decided

against the Applicants, they can approach this Court. Therefore,

today I am not inclined to entertain this application. With these

observations, the application is dismissed.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)