SURENDRA JAGANNATH SHIRSATH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 05.04.2005 of issuance of process under Section 324 of IPC passed in R.C.C. No. 91 of 2005 by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vaijapur, the applicant/original accused has preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 141 of 2005 and being aggrieved by the same order, the original complainant has also preferred Criminal Writ Petition No. 239 of 2005 praying therein to issue process against the respondent/original accused under Section 166 of IPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that the respondent/original complainant is a habitual offender. His antecedents are not clear. There are several criminal complaints against him. He refused to surrender when the police went to arrest him in connection with crime No. 113 of 2004. He has not come to the court with clean hands and has suppressed material facts. The proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the applicant/accused. The credit and reputation of the applicant/accused is put to peril by means of this vexatious criminal litigation, which is nothing but abuse of process of law. Learned counsel submits that no offence is constituted on the face of the complaint, nor there is any evidence to support the allegations against the applicant/accused. The evidence adduced manifestly fails to prove the charge. There is nothing in the complaint to indicate that the applicant/accused was in possession of any dangerous weapons and was likely to cause death as provided in the definition of Section 324 of IPC. It is therefore unfair to call upon the petitioner to rebut the charge for which there is no legal evidence to establish.