High Court · 2025

Legal Reasoning

-1- Cri.Appeal.58.2006IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 58 OF 2006The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station,Jafrabad, Dist : Jalna.… Appellant(Orig. Informant)Versus1.Santosh S/o. Shamrao Dalve, Age : 25 years, 2.Gumfabai W/o. Tanaji Dukre,Age : 30 Years,3.Sukhdeo S/o. Motheba Dalve, Age : 35 years,4.Ganesh S/o. Shrirang Dalvi,Age : 25 yearsAll R/o. Yeota, Tq. Jafrabad, Dist. Jalna … Respondents.(Orig. Accused)......Mr. S. S. Dande, APP for Appellant – State.Mr. Anil H. Dhupe, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4.......CORAM :ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.RESERVED ON : 16 JULY 2025PRONOUNCED ON :28 JULY 2025JUDGMENT : 1.State is hereby assailing the judgment and order ofacquittal dated 31.08.2005 passed by learned Judicial MagistrateFirst Class, Jafrabad in R.C.C. No.1 of 2003 acquitting respondentsfrom offence punishable under section 324 read with section 34 ofIndian Penal Code. -2- Cri.Appeal.58.2006FACTUAL MATRIX2.Prosecution was launched against respondents onreport lodged by PW1 Baliram stating that on 17.11.2002, around8:00 a.m., accused persons picked up quarrel over common ridge inbetween their fields and accused no.1 Santosh gave blow of chainon his head. Accused No.3 Sukhdeo gave kick blows on his face, dueto which informant dislodging his teeth. His father and nephewcame to rescue and that time accused persons gave blow on privatepart of his father. Around 20 accused persons gathered there toassault him, his father and nephew, and therefore, he lodged reportExh.21 and in consequence to which crime was registered bearingNo. 67 of 2002 for offence punishable under section 324 read withsection 34 of IPC. Investigating Officer carried out investigationand after gathering evidence, charge-sheeted accused persons, whowere tried vide R.C.C. No. 1 of 2003, wherein prosecution adducedin all six witnesses and relied on documentary evidence like FIR,injury certificate and pancha etc. After recording statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C.,and on hearing both sides, learned trial court by its judgment andorder dated 31.08.2005 acquitted accused from the above charges,which is now the subject matter of appeal on behalf of State. -3- Cri.Appeal.58.2006RIVAL CONTENTIONS3.Learned APP would point out that, initially informantwas alone with whom dispute was raised by accused persons andhe was duly assaulted by accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 by means of stickand fist blows. That, they are specifically named by informant. Hefurther pointed out that, when informant’s father and nephewcame to rescue, his father was also beaten that too on private part.That, doctor, who provided treatment, is examined by prosecutionand he has placed on record injury certificates. Thus, according tolearned APP, all ingredients for attracting charges are available.That, there is recovery of stick. That, informant’s evidence issupported by not only his wife, but even independent witnesseswho intervened. Role of Santosh, Sukhdeo, Ganesh and Gumfabaiis clearly coming on record. That, witnesses are consistent andtherefore, in spite of availability of evidence of sterling quality,learned trial court has awarded acquit without assigning just andproper reasons. According to learned APP, case of prosecution wasnot proved beyond reasonable doubt as there was independent eyewitness account also. In support of his contention, learned APP soughtreliance on the judgment of this court in the case of State ofMaharashtra v. Gopala Baburao Walke and others reported inMANU/MH/0560/2025. -4- Cri.Appeal.58.20064.In answer to above, learned counsel for respondentsaccused would submit that, prosecution has miserably failed tobring home the charges. That, evidence of witnesses, moreparticularly, informant (PW1) and his wife (PW6) is not consistent.That, there are material omissions, contradictions and variancesthat cross of Medical Officer (PW5) gives rise to another possibilityof injuries. Learned trial court has appreciated the entire evidencemeticulously and not finding the convincing case, trial courtrefused to accept the case of prosecution. For above reasons, heprays to dismiss the appeal for want of merits. EVIDENCE ON RECORD5.For proper appreciation and comprehension, it wouldfruitful to reproduce the very testimonies of relevant witnesses i.e.informant PW1 Baliram and his wife PW6 Vandana and PW5 Dr.Anil Gaikwad, Medical Officer in verbatim as has been stated inwitness box in trial court. PW1 Baliram informant is the informant. Relevantportion of his evidence at Exhibit 20 is as under:-“1.I know all the accused. Incident took place prior to twoyears at about 7.00 a.m. in the field of accused Santosh. Myresidential house is situated in my agricultural field. I was -5- Cri.Appeal.58.2006going to village Yeota from my house for purchasing grossarymaterials. The accused persons called me from the way onaccount of dispute of common banch. Accused persons awayme in their field. The sister of accused no.1 named Gumphabaiwas seated at the spot of incident.She asked me what I had did with her. On which I told that Ihad not did anything. On which accused no.1. assaulted me bymeans of chain on my head. Accused Ganesh landed blow ofstick on my head. Accused Sukhdeo landed kick blow on myface due to which I lost my three teeths. I became unconscious.Thereafter, my father and my nephew rushed to the spot. Myfather asked accused why they are beating on which accusedtold my father cast the vote to others. Accused persons landedkick blow on private part of my father. My nephew Ganthlakas bring the water he given said water to me thereafter Iwas brought in the hospital at Jafrabad.2. In all 20 persons were present at the spot. Theseaccused assaulted me and remaining persons were presentaround me. All they were intending to kill me. Thereafter Ifilled report in police station. The report now shown to mebears my signature contents in it are true and correct. It ismarked at Exh.21. I was created as a UPD patient in JafrabadHospital. Thereafter police arrested me and sent to Harsooljail. I was sent for medical examination through Horsool jail.” PW5 Dr. Gaikwad is the Medical Officer, who examinedPW1 informant, narrated the injuries and identified the injurycertificates. In his testimony, he deposed as under :- -6- Cri.Appeal.58.2006“1.On 17.11.2002 Police of police station Jafrabadreferred Baliram S/o. Sitaram Dalvi for his medicalexamination and treatment. I examined said injured at about11:45 a.m. and found following injuries on his person.(i)Contusion lacerated wound over Temporal region onposterior aspect size 1½ x 1x½ direction of injuryverticle age of injury within 24 hours caused by hardand blunt object nature of injury is simple. (ii)Abrasion over posterior aspect over right Ear ½ x ½verticle in direction within 24 hours caused hard andblunt object simple in nature.(iii)Contusion lacerated wound over left side of the chin size½ x ½ verticle in direction cased by hard and bluntobject nature of injury is simple within 24 hours.(iv)Contusion lacerated would over little finger of righthand size 1x ½ x ½ vertile in direction age within 24hours simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object.I have issued medical certificate accordingly.The medical certificate now shown to me is the same, itis in my own handwriting contents in it are true and correct itbears my signature and seal of Rural Hospital Jafrabad. Ihave mention Identification marks of the patient. I can identifythe injured on the basis of identification marks note down bytoday. I have brought MLC record with me the contents of -7- Cri.Appeal.58.2006medical certificate are true and correct as per record. It ismarked at Exh. 35.” PW6 Vandana is the wife of informant. Relevant portion ofher evidence is as under:-“1.Complainant Baliram is my husband. I know allaccused. Incident took place in the year 2002 in winterseason at about 7:00 a.m. I myself and my family membersresiding in our agricultural land and our residential house issituated in our land. Accused Santosh came and told to myhusband to come towards common bandh as there is disputebetween accused and us on account of common bandh.When my husband went though said bandh accusedGumphabai assaulted my husband by chappal and accusedSantosh assaulted to my husband by chain. Accused Sukhadeolanded blow of stick on the head of my husband. Ganeshlanded blow of stone on my husbnad. My husband sustainedwith bleeding injuries. I myself my father in law and mynephew rescued my husband. “Accused pesons also assualtedto my father in law. Accused Santosh again assaulted to myhusband by means of fist to my husband, my husband loossedteeths. Then we came to Jafrabad. We went to police stationout of accused two accused are present before the court.” 6.Re-appreciated the evidence and visited the impugnedjudgment. In short, case of prosecution is that, PW1 Baliram wasrendering agricultural work in his field on 17.11.2002, accused -8- Cri.Appeal.58.2006persons initially abused him and assaulted him by means ofarticles like chain and sticks.7.Informant has narrated the incident in his evidence atExh.20, wherein he attributed use of stick to Ganesh and kick blowto accused Sukhdeo. However, regarding allegations of hitting hisfather on the private part he has not named specific accused. Lateron, in witness box, he stated that, 20 accused persons had gatheredthere to assault him and kill him. 8.Attention of this court was invited by learned counselfor respondents to the FIR at the instance of Baliram, wherein hehad stated that, Santosh, Gumfabai, Sukhdeo and Ganesh initiallyabused him. What were the abuses is not elaborated. Who amongstthe four exactly abused is also not clarified. There cannot be abusesin chorus. Further, it is specifically mentioned in the FIR that,accused Ganesh hit informant by means of stone. However, inwitness box PW1 informant stated that Ganesh hit informant bymeans of stick. Therefore, there is variance in the contents of FIRand substantive evidence which in fact prevails. 9.Perused the impugned judgment. Learned trial Judgehas considered and appreciated evidence as required under law -9- Cri.Appeal.58.2006and findings have been supported by sound reasons. No infirmityor perversity is brought to our notice in appeal so as to interfere inthe judgment and order under challenge. Hence, the followingorder is passed :ORDERCriminal Appeal is dismissed. (ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.) Tandale