APPLN. 922-11 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 922 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra ... Applicant Vs. Deepak Amar Burman ... Respondent *** Mrs. V. R. Bhosale, APP for the Applicant. *** CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & A. M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 7, 2011 PC: 1. Heard the learned APP, appearing on behalf of the applicant State. This is an application for leave to file appeal challenging the judgment and order passed by the 1st Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, who by his judgment and order dated 10th May, 2011 was pleased to acquit the respondent/ accused of the offences punishable under Section 302, 201 of the I. P. Code. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that accused was traveling in a local train from Bhayander and PW 4 was also traveling in the same local train and he saw the accused throwing a trolley bag out of the running train. He, therefore, questioned him APPLN. 922-11 - 2 - about contents of the bag and when an inquiry was made by PW 4, accused became frightened and therefore, he was taken to the railway police. According to the prosecution witness PW 11 Devraon Sukale, who was the PSI Vasai Railway Police Station, on 24-12-2009 he was on night duty from 9.00 p.m. to 9 a.m. of 25-12-2009 when he was present on the Virar Railway Police Station for patrolling in the night at about 11 p. m. Police Head Constable Dubey informed him that one dead body was lying between Naigaon-Bhayandar line and therefore, he went there and he noticed one dead body was lying on the spot and accordingly, inquest panchanama was drawn by him in presence of panchas. PW 12 Namankit More who was PI attached to Railway , Special Branch, has also corroborated this fact. The person who was apprehended at the instance of PW 4 Nishant Pandit thereafter was shown the dead body and he recognized the dead body as that of his friend Mohan Jagtap and thereafter recoveries were made at his instance and charge sheet was filed against the respondent/accused. 3. We have perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court and have gone through the notes of evidence which are annexed to this application. In our view, there is no infirmity in the findings recorded by the trial court. The trial court has observed that trolley bag which was thrown by the accused was later on recovered and they noticed that it was broken in two parts. Neither PW 1 nor any other witness has stated that dead body was found near the broken bag. Apart from that the dead body was first noticed by PW 11 and PW 12 independently and thereafter the accused has shown that dead body. Since the dead body was not found in the bag APPLN. 922-11 - 3 - which was thrown by the accused from the local-train, there is no evidence to connect commission of offence by the accused. The trial court, therefore, in our view has rightly given benefit of doubt to the respondent/accused. In our view, therefore, this is not a fit case to interfere with the finding given by the trial court. The prayer of the applicant for leave to file appeal is, therefore, rejected. Criminal Application is, accordingly, rejected and disposed of. [ A. M. THIPSAY, J.] [ V. M. KANADE, J.]