Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
EKNATH DNYANDEO SABE AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. POLICE STATION OFFICER, POLICE STATION KHAMGAON RURAL, DIST. BULDHANA – Respondent
apeal206.21
apeal206.21
1
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 206/2021
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 206/2021
Eknath Dnyandeo Sabe & anr.
Eknath Dnyandeo Sabe & anr.
...VERSUS...
...VERSUS...
State of Maharashtra
State of Maharashtra
**************************************************************************************************************
**************************************************************************************************************
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
Court'
s or Judge'
s orders
Court'
s or Judge'
s orders
appearances, Court'
s orders or directions
appearances, Court'
s orders or directions
and Registrar'
s orders
and Registrar'
s orders
**************************************************************************************************************
**************************************************************************************************************
Shri T.M. Hussain, Advocate for the appellants
Shri T.M. Hussain, Advocate for the appellants
Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the respondent
Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the respondent
********
********
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
JUNE 25, 2021
JUNE 25, 2021
1]
This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 challenging the order dated 06/04/2021
passed by the learned Special Judge, Khamgaon, District
Buldhana in Special Case No. 39/2020 in relation to Crime
No. 86/2020 registered on 08/03/2020 with the respondent –
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307,
302, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(r),
3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989 and Sections
4 and 25 of the Arms Act.
2]
The FIR came to be registered with the
accusations that the appellants assaulted brother of the
complainant Rajesh Kalaskar by using sword and knife. It is
further alleged that the appellants along with others hurled
abuses in the name of caste on the complainant. The
Investigating Agency has carried out the investigation and has
filed charge-sheet. The appellants had filed application under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the
ANSARI
ANSARI
apeal206.21
apeal206.21
2
2
learned Special Judge which is rejected by the impugned
order. The appellants have therefore filed the present appeal.
3]
We have heard learned advocate for the
appellants and learned APP for the respondent/State.
4]
On careful perusal of the charge-sheet and in
particular the statements of witnesses namely Dilip,
Parmeshwar, Sindhubai and Shubham (who is minor having
age of 12 years) who have attributed specific role to the
appellants having assaulted the deceased, it prima facie
appears that the appellant no. 1 – Eknath was carrying sword
while the appellant no. 2 – Sopan was carrying knife when
they assaulted the deceased by the said weapons. The post-
mortem report shows as many as 20 injuries on the vital parts
of the deceased. From the material produced in the form of
charge- sheet, prima facie it appears that the appellants along
with other accused were present at the site with dangerous
weapons like sword, knife and iron rod. Prima facie, we are
satisfied that there is sufficient material against the present
appellants to show their complexity in the crime alleged
against them. Having considered the gravity of the offences
and the allegations made against the appellants, we are
satisfied that the order o
