SHESHRAO S/O VISHWANATHRAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION applicants as well as their Advocates remained absent. Heard submissions advanced by Mr D B Yengal, learned APP representing the State of Maharashtra who, at the outset, submitted that no Criminal Appeal was filed in order to challenge the judgment and order dated 28.8.2006 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli, whereby the original accused nos. 1 to 9 were acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 498A, 304B, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short ' IPC') . According to Mr.Yengal, the learned APP of Gadchiroli had informed the the Office of Government Pleader by letter bearing Outward No. DGP /PP /173 /2008 dated 14.2.2008 that in the present case, the Law and judiciary Department did not consider it a fit case to file an appeal to the High Court.

(2.) IT appears that the instant Revision Application was preferred by the father of alleged victim Manjusha, probably due to emotional outbursts. Mr. Mardikar, learned Advocate representing the respondents 2 to 10 submitted that the impugned judgment and order does not suffer from serious error of law or misappreciation of evidence. There was an inordinate delay of about 5 months even to lodge first information report, which itself was fatal to the prosecution case or at least to cause suspicion regarding genuineness of the accusations.