DIGAMBAR BHUJANG KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. G.G. Suryawanshi, the learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. U.B. Billolikar, the learned advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 7. Heard Mr. T.S. Lodhe, the learned A.P.P. for respondent no.1/State.

(2.) This appeal challenges the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge 3, Nanded, in Sessions Case no. 48/2010, whereby he acquitted the respondent nos. 2 to 7, who were the accused in the said case, of offences punishable under Sections 306 of IPC, 504 IPC and 506 of IPC r/w Section 34 of IPC.

(3.) Since a doubt was raised about the maintainability of present appeal, Mr. Suryawanshi submits that the appellant being 'a victim' within the meaning of clause 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the present appeal by him, is maintainable by virtue of proviso to Section 372 of the Code. He submits that the appellant is the father of the victim and has suffered mentally and physically, by reason of the acts of respondent nos. 2 to 7. According to him, therefore, the appellant would fall within the definition of victim, as given in the said clause 2(wa) of the Code, and as such, the appeal would be maintainable.