Advocates:
['PIYUSH M SHUKLA', '', 'ABHINAV VYAS', 'APP']

1/9

36-revn-152-22(j).odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

CRIMINAL

REVISION APPLICATION

NO.

152

OF 20

22

1.

Navneet S/o Mohan Bagahe,

Aged about 26 years, Occ. Service,

R/o MQ-183, Ward No.31, Jery

Chowk, Shobhapur Colony,

Shobhapur, Pethakheda, Betul,

Madhya Pradesh 460 449

2.

Amit S/o Devidas Hanote,

Aged about 25 years, Occ. Service,

R/o 293, P.H.No.2, Yenkheda Tahsil

Multai, Dist. Betul,

Madhya Pradesh-460 557

…. Applicants

// VERSUS //

State of Maharashtra, through Police

Station Officer, Police Station Saoner,

Dist. Nagpur

... Non-applicant

Shri Piyush Shukla, Advocate for applicant.

Ms. Shamsi Haider, APP for the State / Non-applicant.

CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATED : 20^th OCTOBER, 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

In the present revision application a challenge is raised to the

order dated 29^th December, 2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge-8, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 305 of 2021 vide order below

Sknair

2/9

36-revn-152-22(j).odt

Exh.31, rejecting the application filed under Section 227 of Code of

Criminal Procedure for discharge.

2.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 17^th November,

2021 one Dharmendra Bharti lodged a complaint that his son Vishal

during the night intervening 11^th November, 2020 and 12^th November,

2020 had gone out with accused Mithun Koche, however, he did not

return home during the whole night. In the morning 12^th November,

2020 around 9.30 am when the daughter of the informant made a phone

call on the mobile of the deceased, it was picked up by the police officials

who informed her that the deceased was found in unconscious state under

the bridge of Pandhurna – Kalmeshwar bye-pass on Kolar river. In the

hospital, he was declared brought death. Accordingly, the crime was

registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section

34 of Indian Penal Code against the accused Mithun Koche. During the

investigation, memorandum under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act

was recorded, wherein the accused Mithun Koche disclosed the name of

the applicants and alleged that at the relevant time the applicants were

presents with him at the spot of incident. Thereupon, the applicants were

arrayed as accused.

3.

During the investigation, nothing incriminating against the

applicants was found. Thus, only basis to arraign the applicants as

accused is memorandum under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

In the said memorandum, the accused no.1 has stated that while they

were on the bridge, exchange of hot words took place between the

Sknair

3/9

36-revn-152-22(j).odt

deceased and the accused no.1 and in the same he gave a push to the

deceased because of which he fell down from the bridge. He states that at

that time the applicants were sitting in the car and after the deceased fell

down from the bridge, he went to the applicants and informed them

about the incident. Thereupon, they reached to the deceased and found

him lying in the pull of blood, therefore, they fled away.

4.

Thereafter, the chargesheet was filed. Thereupon, application

under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was moved by the

applicants for discharge which came to be rejected vide impugned order

dated 29^th December, 2021. The same is impugned in the present

proceeding.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and

learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

6.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that except the

memorandum under Section 27 of Evidence Act, there is no other

material showing any involvement of the applicants. It is submitted that

even if the statement of memorandum is accepted, it is clear that no role

is attributed to the applicants and there is nothing to show any

involvement of the applicants in the alleged offence.

7.

It is submitted that without considering the material on

record and law in relation to nature of sta