STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SIDDHARTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State proposes to take exception to the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 17/6/2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalna acquitting accused nos.1 to 4 and 6 from charges under Sec. 302, 307, 324, 147, 148, 323, 506 read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code and Sec. 135 of Bombay Police Act in Sessions Case No.76 of 2016.

(2.) Heard learned APP for the Applicant - State. She took us through the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and evidence and would submit that there is crucial evidence of PW-4 Geeta and PW-6 Anjana. They are important witnesses. Their evidence inspires confdence. However, learned trial Court has disbelieved their testimonies. It is pointed out that deceased Punjabai an old lady was assaulted by accused. While undergoing treatment, she succumbed to the injuries. Accused are solely responsible for the same. Ocular account was supported by medical account. Statements of witnesses are got recorded under Sec. 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which are consistent as regards to occurrence of assault is concerned. It is submitted that, in spite of suffcient incriminating evidence, learned trial Judge has failed to consider and appreciate the quality of above evidence and therefore, as State intends to prefer appeal against the same, it is prayed that, the leave application deserves to be granted.

(3.) In the light of above submissions, we have undertaken the scrutiny of entire evidence placed before learned trial court. It seems that, in this case prosecution has rested their case on testimonies of in all 8 witnesses and has relied on other documentary evidence like, FIR, inquest, P.M. and various panchanamas.