1/8

3.Apeal-148-2008.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.148 OF 2008

The State of Maharashtra

….Appellant/Complainant

V/s.

1. Bhimrama Sidhagonda Jawalgi

Age – 35 years, Occu.: Agriculture,

R/o. Jamapur Shirval, Taluka - Akkalkot

2. Sidhagonda Bhimrama Jawalgi

Age – 65 years, Occu.: Agriculture,

R/o. Jamapur Shirval, Taluka - Akkalkot

3. Shivanand Sidhagonda Jawalgi

Age – 20 years, Occu.: Unemployed,

R/o. Jamapur Shirval, Taluka - Akkalkot

.….Respondents/Accused

----

Ms. Anamika Malhotra, APP for State – Appellant.

Mr. Sameer Kumbhakoni for respondents.

----

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 5^th JANUARY 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1

This is an appeal impugning an order and judgment dated

1^st October 2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akkalkot,

acquitting four accused of offences punishable under Sections 325

(Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 323 (Punishment for

voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke

breach of the peace) and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) read

with Section 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common

intention) of Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2

Complainant (PW-2) was residing in South Solapur alongwith

her sister and children near Jeur village. According to prosecution, PW-2 and

Gauri Gaekwad

2/8

3.Apeal-148-2008.doc

her relatives were having land admeasuring 4 H and 13 guntas and they

were cultivating the same. PW-2 had purchased land from one Sidhagonda

Bhimrama Jawalgi in the year 1988 and some time in March 2003, 15 years

later, the name of the purchaser was noted in the 7/12 extract. Therefore, on

28^th May 2003 at about 9.00 a.m., PW-2 and her sister (PW-4) went to the

said land to worship the plough. At that time, the adjacent land holder, i.e.,

the accused, who are also related to complainant, objected to PW-2

worshiping the plough and started abusing them and beating them with

sticks. PW-2 and PW-4 sustained injury. The accused allegedly protested to

PW-2 and PW-4 doing the puja to the plough because according to accused

the land belonged to accused. When PW-2 tried to explain that she has

purchased the land but the accused denied that she could have purchased

the land and continued with the assault. Thereafter, the accused left the

place. There were no eye witnesses. PW-2 went and narrated the incident to

the Valsang police, who referred PW-2 and PW-4 for medical treatment to

Civil Hospital, Solapur. After treatment, they went back to Valsang police.

At that time, they were informed that the jurisdiction is of Akkalkot South

Police Station and therefore, they lodged the complaint in Akkalkot Police

Station on 6^th June 2003. FIR was registered, investigation commenced, spot

panchnama etc. was prepared and after receiving the medical certificate etc.

chargesheet was filed and charges were framed. The accused pleaded not

guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused is of total denial

and false implication. After considering the evidence, the Trial Court was

Gauri Gaekwad

3/8

3.Apeal-148-2008.doc

pleased to acquit the accused. I concur with the conclusions arrived at by the

Trial Court.

3

There are no eye witnesses. Therefore, the only evidence that

would be material is of PW-2 and PW-4. In the cross examination, PW-2

admits that her husband and accused no.1 are brothers and PW-2 was the

daughter of the sister of mother of accused no.1, which means PW-2,

complainant and accused no.1 were cousins. In the cross examination, PW-2

admits that in the complaint she has not mentioned about worshiping the

plough but only says was worshiping the field. In the complaint PW-2 is also

silent about accused no.2 and accused no.3 assaulting her. PW-4, the sister of

PW-2, in her cross examination admits that they are close relatives of the

accused and upto 2003 the name of the purchaser was not recorded for land

Gat No.27/1, which is the