1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1552 OF 2009 Trimbak S/o Shankar Deshmukh ..... APPICANT V E R S U S Girish Rangnath Bhavsar & another .... RESPONDENTS Shri. V.N.Hon, Advocate for Applicant. Shri. V.H.Dighe, A.P.P. for the State. [ CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. ] DATE : 12/06/2009 ------------------------------------------------- PER COURT : 1. This is an application seeking leave to present Appeal under Section 378 (4) of Code of Criminal Procedure for raising challenge to the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class ), Sakri, district Dhule on 31/1/2009 in Criminal Case No. 105 of 2000. The applicant lodged a complaint against the accused alleging commission of offence 2 punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The accused no. 2 Harilal Bhavsar is already dead. As such, his name stood deleted. 2. It is the contention of the complainant that he is Chairman of Pimpalner Education Society since 13/10/1996. The accused is merely a life member of the Trust. However, he has asserted and acted as a Chairman of the Trust and fabricated the record to suit his claim. It is also alleged that the accused is instrumental in terminating services of one Popat Ahire, who was serving as Professor in the College. The complainant has further alleged that the accused has fabricated record in respect of resolutions passed on 26/10/1998 in respect of termination of services of Professor Popat Ahire. The accused had controverted the allegations and claim that the charge is false and the criminal prosecution is initiated with a view to silence the accused, who is fighting litigation before various authorities against the complainant. 3. The learned trial Judge while dealing with the matter, recorded finding that there is dispute in respect of control over the management of the Trust since 1994. There were proceedings initiated in that regard before the Charity Commissioner, Bombay so also at District 3 Court, Dhule and High Court, bench at Aurangabad. In a proceeding bearing Appeal No. 24 of 1998, the Charity Commissioner, Bombay has directed suspension to the resolution dated 13/10/1996 in respect of election of the complainant as a Chairman of the Trust. The Appeal presented by the complainant against the order issued by the Charity Commissioner bearing No. 36 of 1999 also came to be dismissed. The complainant thereafter approached the High Court, Bench at Aurangabad by presenting Appeal No. 2 of 2000, which was also dismissed. The trial Court has further observed that the change report in respect of election of complainant as a Chairman of the Trust recorded in the meeting dated 13/10/1996 does not appear to have been approved by the competent authorities. It is thus clear that there was a dispute in respect of the complainant’s entitlement to remain as a Chairman of the Trust since 13/10/1996 and prior to that also, the proceedings were pending before various authorities in respect of control over the management of the Trust. In this view of the matter, the learned Judge of the trial Court reached conclusion that the complainant can not invoke penal provisions of Section 420 of Indian Penal Code with a view to level allegations/charges against the accused. 4. I have perused the Judgment recorded by the learned 4 Magistrate and heard the arguments advanced by Mr. Hon, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. The view adopted by the trial court appears to be reasonable and logical. Merely because some 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 in exercise of powers under Section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure. There is no merit in the application. The applicant, therefore, stands rejected. The application seeking leave to file Appeal against the order of acquittal, therefore, stands rejected. Consequently, the Appeal also stands dismissed. [ R.M.BORDE ] JUDGE knp/CRIAPLN1552.09