KISHOR @ KESHAV NAMDEORAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH P.S.O.
LAWS(BOM)-2017-11-196
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: NAGPUR)
Decided on November 09,2017

Kishor @ Keshav Namdeorao ... Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Mah.Thr.Pso Akola Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ROHIT B.DEO,J. - (1.) The appellant seeks to assail judgment and order dated 29.10.2004 delivered by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Trial 39/2002, by and under which, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") is convicted for offence punishable under section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-.
(2.) Heard Shri Ranjit Singh, the learned counsel for appellant and Shri Ashish Kadukar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
(3.) Shri Singh, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the judgment of conviction is against the weight of evidence on record and is manifestly erroneous. The learned counsel would submit that the evidence of the complainant Smt. Anandibai Astarkar is inconsistent with the contents of the First Information Report Exh.27. The learned counsel would further submit that the evidence of P.W.3-Sheshrao Faltankar and P.W.5-Pralhad Faltankar, the two brothers of the informant Anandibai is marred by inter se contradictions and embellishments. The prosecution did not examine any independent witness to establish that the accused burnt the house of the informant Anandibai, is the submission. The learned counsel would further submit that the prosecution has not even established that the residence which is allegedly razed to the ground due to fire is owned or belongs to the informant Anandibai. The spot panchnama on record is not proved since neither the panch nor the Police Officer who drew the spot panchnama have been examined. The judgment of conviction dangerously borders on perversity, is the submission.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.