1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1856/2009 State of Maharashtra vs. Arjun Laxman Sayam ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. CORAM : A.P.Lavande & Prasanna B. Varale,JJ DATE : 26.6.2009 Heard Mr. A.G.Muzumdar, learned A.P.P. for the applicant. 2. By this application, the applicant seeks leave to appeal against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 27th January, 2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No. 130/2007 acquitting the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The respondent was charged for having committed murder of one Diwakar at Indira Gandhi Square. On 14.7.2007 investigation started pursuant to the confession at report lodged by the accused himself. In the course of trial the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and produced several documents. 4. To prove the case against the respondent the 2` prosecution relied upon the following three circumstances. 1. Confession of the accused; 2. Discovery of the axe at the instance of the accused and; 3. Discovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused. 5. The trial court held that none of the three circumstances was proved inasmuch as confession made to the police was not admissible; secondly the discovery of the axe at the instance of the accused was not proved inasmuch as police already knew about the axe as per the statement made by the accused himself and thirdly in so far as the recovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of the accused is concerned neither the panch witness nor investigating officer deposed about the presence of blood on the clothes which were seized. 6. Having heard the learned A.P.P. for applicant and having perused the Judgment we are of the considered opinion that no case has been made out by the applicant to grant leave to appeal against the Judgment and order of acquittal. In our opinion the learned Additional Sessions Judge was perfectly 3` justified in holding that the circumstances sought to be proved against the accused were not proved. The chain of circumstances connecting the accused with the crime was not complete. Therefore, in our considered opinion, no fault can be found with the impugned Judgment and order. We find that no case has been made to grant leave to appeal against the Judgment of acquittal. Hence, the application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE patle