LAWS(BOM)-2019-11-193

VITTHAL SITARAM THANGE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On November 06, 2019
Vitthal Sitaram Thange Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned A.P.P. waives service for the respondent no.1, learned advocate Mr. R.S. Kasar waives service for the respondent no.2- original complainant. With the consent of both the sides the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) Only a short point which arises in this revision is as to whether the learned Additional Sessions Judge was right in allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent no.2 who is the heir of the original complainant and remanding the matter back to the trial Court for further inquiry.

(3.) According to the prosecution on account of a previous civil dispute between the deceased and his cousins a suit for partition was filed which was decreed. His cousins then put the decree to execution. During pendency of the execution cousins sold some of the disputed property to the present applicants-accused. On that basis they tried to take forcible possession of the disputed property. The deceased therefore filed Regular Civil Suit against them and an injunction was clamped against the applicants which was in operation for about ten years. However, the injunction was vacated in an appeal preferred by the applicants but was again restored by this Court. It was alleged that annoyed by injunction only three days after their appeal against the order of injunction was vacated by the District Court the applicants tried to take forcible possession of the disputed property and in the process caused grievous hurt to the deceased and the respondent no.2 who is his son. The matter was reported to the police. The offence was registered and in due course of time the applicants were charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 325, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The learned Magistrate however framed charge for the offences punishable under Section 326 , 504 , 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. At the conclusion of the trial the learned Magistrate acquitted the applicants of all the charges.