1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2169/2009 The State of Maharashtra. Applicant. V E R S U S Ramdas Kharad and others Respondents. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, Learned APP for applicant-state. Mr. A.B. Karande, advocate for respondent Nos.1,3,5,8,9,17,18,20 and 22. Mr. C.V. Thombre advocate for respondent Nos. 2,4,6,7, 10 to 12 and 13,11,14,15,16,19,21,23, 24,25,26 CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 11 TH JUNE, 2010. PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned APP Mrs. Khekale for the applicant and learned counsel Mr. A.B. Karade and Mr. C.V. Thombre for the respondents No.1 to 26. The applicant-state has preferred present application seeking leave to file appeal against judgment and order of acquittal rendered by learned Adhoc District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No.48/2008 on 21.2.2009 acquitting the respondents herein i.e. original accused for the offence punishable under section 147, 148, 452, 337, 436, 504 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code and under section 37 read with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 2 2. I have perused the impugned judgment dated 21.2.2009 as well as scrutinized the record and proceeding with the assistance of learned APP Mrs. Khekale and learned counsel Mr. Karande and Mr. Thombare for the respondents. It is apparent that in all 26 accused faced the trial for the charges under aforesaid section of Indian Penal Code and prosecution examined in as much as 10 witnesses to substantiate the said charges. Out of the said witnesses PW 2 Hirabai Somnath Aute, PW 3 Dnyaneshwar Kolekar, PW 4 Sunil Jagannath Aute, PW 5 Abasaheb Giri, PW 6 Jyoti Giri and PW 8 Manisha Ramgude are alleged to be eye witness and PW 7 Dr. Sadashiv Raut is medical officer where as PW 9 Raichand Dhole and PW 10 Sayyed Ali Omar Ali are the investigation officers. 3. It is alleged that Grampanchayat elections of village Malegaon (K) Tq. Gevrai District Beed took place on 7.10.2007 and counting thereof was held on 9.10.2007 and after declaration of the result of the election alleged incident of pelting stones and firing on hotel of complainant and setting it on fire took place at about 3.00 p.m on 9.10.2007. However, it appears that although prosecution examined six eye witnesses, there are no specific allegations against the accused persons and no specific role/overt act has been attributed to each of the accused in the occurrence of the incident. Moreover, although PW 4 Sunil Aute stated names of the accused in his deposition but there are general and omnibus allegations against them and no specific role has been attributed to each of the accused during the occurrence 3 of the incident therein. Hence, observations made by the learned trial judge in paragraph No.31 in the impugned judgment cannot be faulted with. 4. Having taken comprehensive view to the matter, it is apparent that view adopted by learned trial judge after scrutinizing and appreciating evidence on record, is a possible view to be adopted and there appears to be no perversity in arriving at the conclusion by learned trial judge to acquit the accused persons i.e. respondents herein. 5. In the circumstances, present application bears no substance and same is devoid of merits and therefore same stands dismissed and leave to file appeal refused. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. ) ..... aaa/2169.09