Mrs. Vasanti Sanjay Ghatge v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 32 OF 2012 Mrs. Vasanti Sanjay Ghatge. ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. Anand S. Patil for the Applicant. Ms. P.P. Bhosale, APP for the State. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 28th SEPTEMBER 2012. P.C. :- Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant extensively.
Discharge application moved before the learned J.M.F.C., Court No.3, Kolhapur dated 9th January 2008 was rejected. Feeling aggrieved, Criminal Revision Application No.41 of 2008 was moved before the learned Additional sSessions Judge at Kolhapur, rejection thereof is questioned.
The complaint and the statement of the pupil with whose paper manipulation was done indicates the Applicant with her role, as the Applicant approached her with other teachers to ensure getting a substituted answer-sheet written as the answer-sheet No. F-097817 of said student Dhanashree was lost. It was under part of conspiracy, another answer-sheet 2 APL 32.12.sxw No.L-097996 of Block No.8 of 10th Standard was got, and under the dictum of one of the teacher, fresh answers were recorded from said student Dhanashree. An application was also taken from her that her earlier seat number/code number is torn, therefore, fresh code number with fresh sheet should be supplied to her. It is unfortunate part thereafter for the Applicant, that the original answer-sheet of said pupil Dhanashtree was found in the hall, beneath the cupboard and entire mystery is revealed. The role of the Applicant in hatching the conspiracy, playing fraud with the system creating forged document is demonstrated.
I do not see any reason to disturb the orders against the Applicant. Application dismissed.
(K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.