Ravindra Balvantrao Dhote vs Mahadev Namdev Raut

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1889

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
M.M.NERLIKAR
Ravindra Balvantrao Dhote – Appellant
Versus
Mahadev Namdev Raut – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Ms. S.K. Phaltankar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. S.P. Hedaoo, Advocate

Order :

M.M. NERLIKAR, J.

The principal challenge in this matter pertains to acquittal in case under the provisions of Indian Penal Code, 1860. This Application/Appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. Now so far as the issue in respect of preferring Appeal under Section 372 of the Code by the complainant/victim is concerned, the same was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of M/s. Celestium Financial .Vrs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc (2025 SCC Online SC 1320), wherein the Supreme Court has held as under:

“6.4 On a reading of the definition of ‘victim’, it is clear that the said expression is initially exhaustive and thereafter inclusive. The expression ‘victim’ means a person who has suffered any loss or injury. The loss or injury could be either physical, mental, a financial loss or injury. The expression injury could also be construed as a legal injury in a wider sense and not just a physical or a mental injury. The loss or injury must be caused by reason of an act or omission for which the accused person has been charged. Thus, it can be both by a positive act or negatively by an omission which is at the instance of the accused and for w