1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1396 OF 2009 Tanhaji S/o Laxman Ohol ....APPLICANT V E R S U Bhausaheb S/o Gopinath Wable & Others ....RESPONDENTS Shri. S.S.Kazi, Advocate for Applicant. [ CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. ] DATE : 08/06/2009 ------------------------------------------ PER COURT : 1. This is an application seeking leave to present an Appeal raising exception to the Judgment and Order recorded by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Newasa on 7/3/2009 in S.T.C. No. 5 of 2004. The applicant was instrumental in launching prosecution against the accused for the offence punishable U/s 7 (1) (d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act and Section 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The complainant is resident of village Antarwali, whereas accused no. 1 is Sarpanch of said village. Accused no. 2 is Secretary of the Society 2 whereas accused no. 3 is real brother of accused no. 2. Accused no. 4 Atmaram is related to accused nos. 1 to 3. The complainant states that he belongs to Mahar caste (Scheduled Caste). The Government had sanctioned the sum of Rs. 2,000/- for repair of his house. Initially, the Government had sanctioned the proposal of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the complainant, out of which the complainant has received Rs. 7,000/-. The complainant had approached the office bearers of village Panchayat for securing the cheque of balance amount of Rs. 2,000/-. It is stated that on the relevant day i.e. on 27/9/2003 when the complainant had been to the accused no. 1, who is Sarpanch of village, he (accused no. 1) abused him on the ground of caste. It is alleged that the accused no. 2 gave slap on his face, whereas accused no. 4 also hurled abuses against him. He thereafter went to Police Station and tried to lodge F.I.R. However, the police officials did not record the F.I.R. As such, he forwarded the copies of complaint to the Chief Minister and Superintendent of Police, and thereafter after waiting for about 23 days, lodged complaint in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (First Class). 2. The complainant in order to prove his case, examined himself and adduced evidence of other 2 witnesses. The defence of the accused is of total denial. The trial Court after recording the evidence of the complainant and the statement of accused U/s 313 of Code of 3 Criminal Procedure, came to the conclusion that the complainant has not established allegations leveled by him against the accused and hence by Judgment and order passed on 7/3/2009, acquitted the accused. 3. I have perused the Judgment recorded by the trial Court and heard learned counsel Shri. S.S.Kazi appearing for the complainant/Applicant. 4. The trial Judge found that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is not consistent. Apart from delay in lodging complaint, the Court found that the complainant has not proved his case in respect of sanction of amount of Rs. 10,000/- in his favour by the State Government under some scheme. The complainant has also not produced any evidence in respect of receipt of Rs. 7,000/- under the scheme. There is absolutely no evidence in respect of sanction of further sum of Rs. 3,000/- or Rs. 2,000/- as stated by the complainant, which was recoverable from the village Panchayat. The complainant has also not stated anything about existence of his house, house number or the Survey number where the house property is situated. Under these circumstances, the trial Judge found it unsafe to place reliance on the evidence put up by the complainant. The view adopted by the learned trial Judge appears to be logical and reasonable. Merely because some 4 other view is also possible in the facts and circumstances of the case, can not be a ground for causing interference in the order of acquittal. There is no merit in the appeal. The application seeking leave to present Appeal stands rejected. Consequently, the Appeal also stands dismissed. [ R.M.BORDE ] JUDGE knp/CRIAPPLN1396.09