SAMADHAN RAMRAO GHANGHAV Vs. ARUNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appellant, who is informant, by invoking provisions under Sec. 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), is questioning sustainability and legality of Judgment and Order dtd. 12/4/2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna in Sessions Case No.88 of 2017 by which respondent Nos.1 and 3 stood acquitted from commission of offence under Ss. 302, 323, and 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).

(2.) Heard learned Advocate for the appellant.

(3.) It is submitted before us that present appellant is the brother of deceased Santosh. It is pointed out that deceased Santosh was married to respondent No.1 Aruna. That immediately after marriage, respondent No.1 Aruna was insisting deceased Santosh to reside separately from others. That, thereafter respondent No.1 Aruna and her parents all three of them pressurized deceased Santosh to get partition of land done and thereafter, compelled him to sell it. Thereafter, again these accused persons pressurized deceased Santosh to get more land transferred in the name of accused No.1 and on failure, they threatened him with dire consequences and as such they harassed him.