IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2145 OF 2003 Prabhakar Dattatraya Metkari .. Applicant Versus Anna Vitthal Patil & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.R.S.Kate for the applicant. Mr.Sachin R. Rahate for respondent nos.1 to 3. Ms.A.J.Jhaveri, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 21st March 2009. : 21st March 2009. : 21st March 2009. P.C.: . Heard the learned advocate appearing for the applicant. The applicant is the original complainant who has filed this application for seeking special leave to appeal under sub-section 4 of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant filed a private complaint alleging commission of offence under section 147, 148, 307, 504, 506 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The process was issued on the private complaint by the learned Judge. By the impugned judgment and order, the accused have been acquitted. 2. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, I find no case is made out for grant (2) of leave. The prosecution examined three witnesses. The complainant examined himself. The complainant also examined another witness by the name Aba Krishna Ghodake and third witness is Investigating Officer who had investigated into the alleged offence as per the directions of the learned Magistrate. Perusal of the judgment shows that the learned Judge has minutely considered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and has recorded a finding that the evidence of the complainant was not trustworthy and reliable. The learned Judge found that there was previous enmity between the complainant-applicant and the accused. The learned Judge found that the injuries on the person of the complainant were simple in nature. The learned Judge considered the defence of the accused that at the time of alleged incident the complainant was under the influence of alcohol. 3. I find that the findings recorded by the learned Judge are possible findings which could have been recorded on the basis of evidence on record. No case is made out for grant of leave. Application is rejected. (A.S.Oka,J)