AABA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned senior counsel Shri V.D. Sapkal for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, had framed the charges against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 302, 452, 342, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code . It is an admitted fact that the discharge application of the applicant was rejected. Against the said order, the Criminal Writ petition was filed. However, as per the statement of the learned senior counsel, it was withdrawn, and thereafter, the charges were framed on 15/12/2022. The incident happened the year 2014.

(3.) Perusal of the record referred to by the learned senior counsel appears that the deceased initially gave a statement that he met with a vehicular accident. He was admitted to the hospital by a corporator. On his statement, the vehicular road accident case was registered. However, the police did not prepare the spot panchnama as per the statement of the deceased, which was given immediately after the alleged incident. Subsequently, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. The first informant/mother has specifically alleged that the deceased told her the incident as alleged on the basis of which the charges have been framed. It appears from the oral dying declaration of the deceased given to his mother that the accused had mercilessly assaulted him for Rs.50,000.00 and he died of the said injuries.