( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2400 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra APPLICANT VERSUS Sidhram Gurushantappa Nagansure and others RESPONDENTS ..... Mrs. R.D. Reddy, APP for the applicant. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 12th August, 2009] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The State has preferred this application against judgement of acquittal in Special Case No. 7/2004 and seeks permission to file the appeal. 3. Upon hearing the learned APP and on going through the impugned judgement rendered by the learned Special Judge, it appears that the criminal case is ( 2 ) offshoot of political rivalry in the village. The complainant – PW Ratnamala Kamble lodged a complaint dated 18-02-2004 alleging that she was the elected Sarpanch of the village and yet, in order to cause insult to her, the Gram Sevak and other office bearers including Deputy Sarpanch Sidhheshwar(accused No.3) prepared an illegal resolution of no confidence against her and purposely though she was present at the occasion of flag hoisting ceremony in the Gram Panchayat office on 15-08-2003, arranged the flag hoisting at hands of a Freedom Fighter by name Shri Vishwanath Rayappa Matge. This was done with a view to humiliate her in public place and in public view for the reason that she is member of Scheduled Caste i.e. Chambhar. The learned Special Judge found that a resolution was adopted against the complainant and, therefore, she was no more Sarpanch of the village at the material time. It was also noticed that the complainant had filed writ petition No. 509/2003 in the context of said no confidence motion. The learned Special Judge further noticed that a resolution was passed that flag hoisting ceremony be held at hands of a Freedom Fighter instead ( 3 ) of the Sarpanch because there was dispute about legal status of the Sarpanch. 4. The record shows that there was no intentional insult caused to the complainant on the ground that she is member of Scheduled Caste. The testimony of PW2 Shrimant revealed that he withdrew support to the case of prosecution. He is the ex-sarpanch of the village. The status of the complainant as sarpanch was a disputed fact at the material time and, therefore, mere fact that the flag hoisting ceremony was arranged at hands of the Freedom Fighter would not indicate intentional insult caused to her in the public view. The reasons ascribed by the learned Special Judge appear to be quite proper. Consequently, the leave to appeal is refused. The application is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/CRIAPLN2400-09 ( 4 )