BABU TATYARAO KSHIRSAGAR Vs. BHIKAJI MAROTRAO KSHIRSAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner/complainant, being aggrieved by the reversal order dated18.9.1998, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani, whereby, all the accused have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 341 and 326 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) AS per the prosecution, on26.6.1985 at about7. 00 p. m. , the petitioner/complainant was going towards village purna. All the accused persons assaulted the petitioner. The accused were armed with sticks and axe. the complainant received severe injuries, which resulted into amputation of his right leg. He lodged complaint with hatta police station at about11. 00 hours. The offence was registered accordingly.

(3.) THE Apex Court in case of K. Chinnaswamy Reddy Vs. State of A. P. reported in AIR 1962 SC 1788, while dealing with Section439 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. P. C. , 1898), Now Section401 of Cr. P. C. , observed as under: " It is true that it is open to a High Court in revision to set aside an order of acquittal even at the instance of private parties, though the State may not have thought fit to appeal; but this jurisdiction should in our opinion be exercised by the High Court only in exceptional cases, when there is some glaring defect in the procedure or there is manifest error on a point of law and consequently there has been a flagrant miscarriage of justice. ". . . . . THEse cases may be; where the trial Court has no jurisdiction to try the case but has still acquitted the accused, or where the trial Court has wrongly shut out evidence which the prosecution wish to produce, or where the appeal Court has wrongly held evidence which was admitted by the trial Court to be inadmissible, or where material evidence has been overlooked either by the trial Court or by the Appeal Court, or where the acquittal is based on a compounding of the offence, which is invalid under the law. "