STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SUNIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard rival submissions at length on this appeal preferred by the State of Maharashtra against acquittal of respondent/ original accused. Perused the evidence recorded before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur. Also perused the reasoning given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge while deciding Sessions Case No. 127 of 1993.

(2.) The impugned judgment and order acquitting the respondent/original accused was passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 10th March, 1997. Respondent/accused was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of acquittal, the State of Maharashtra preferred the appeal which is under consideration.

(3.) Initially, another lawyer was representing respondent/accused. However, when the matter was taken up for final hearing before us, respondent was not represented. As such, ultimately, learned Advocate Mr A. S. Mardikar was appointed to represent the respondent in the present appeal.