Bhaskar Kashinath Malsane v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 353
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 265, 313
Judgment
Mr.Narayan Rokade i/b. Mr.Ajinkya Vilas Taskar:- Advocate for Applicant. Mr.Ashok Gawai:- APP for Respondent – State. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 2nd AUGUST 2024 P. C. :-
#2. Heard learned Advocate Shri. Rokade for the Applicant. There is a conviction for the offences under Sections 352, 323, 506 (Part-I) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.1 There is acquittal for the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC.
#3. Following contentions were raised:- 1 IPC Satish Sangar (i) Independent witnesses were not examined though available. (ii) The Investigating Officer is not examined. (iii) Summary trial procedure is applicable whereas, the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732 was not recorded in Marathi. (iv) As per Section 265 of Cr.P.C., the language is Marathi. There is also a Government Resolution to that effect.3 It is taken on record. (v) He relied upon the following judgments:- (a) Prashant P. Giri and others v/s. State of Maharashtra and others4 (b) Pratap Prakash Jadhav v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.5
#4. Stand over to 5th August 2024. To be listed “High on Board”. [S. M. MODAK, J.] 2 Cr.P.C. 3 General Administration Department : 21st July 1998. 4 5 Writ Petition No. 10021 of 2022 : 7th September 2022 : Bombay High Court 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 733 Satish Sangar
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.