1 CR.APL NO.606/2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 14. APPLN/606/2011 RAJU BABURAO POUL [Criminal] V/S THE STATE OF MAH -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.R.N.Dhorde, Adv., h/f Mr. V.R.Dhorde, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. K.M.Suryawanshi, APP for State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 22-2-2011 1. Heard. Learned A.P.P. informs, on circulation note itself notice was directed and, consequently, he is served, he waives service and is equipped with investigation papers and report. Accused seeks release on bail. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the accused/applicant and learned A.P.P. The complainant and the accused are in close relations. The incident has taken place on 20th June, 2010, wherein the complainant Kisanrao informed that when he was busy in agricultural operations, the accused/applicant 2 CR.APL NO.606/2011 Raju came with an axe, assaulted him on temporal region at left arms, at knees and shin. The accused was claiming that he desires to eliminate said complainant Kisanrao. This is so stated by four witnesses, as is referred in the chargesheet. 3. Learned Counsel, while castigating the weakness of the prosecution case, took me to the so called belated FIR and also to the reports of the Medical Officer forwarded to the Police. He desired to impress, that the complainant at the first opportunity did not inform to the Police about the accused/applicant to be the assaulter. 4. With the assistance of learned Counsel, having gone through the certificate dt.20th June, 2010, issued by Yashoda Hospital, it is explicit, it was not a communication from the complainant but it was communication from relations to Medical Officer. Consequently, it could not be to 3 CR.APL NO.606/2011 the discredit of the complainant. The other certificate, a formal communication from Government Medical Officer, informing the Police that patient is admitted, having suffered injuries at his head and arms and he has been sent to Nanded. There was no reason for the Medical Officer to have named the assailant or record the statement of the complainant. Consequently, these reports will not be diluting the prosecution case. 5. The second limb of the submission was different number of injuries in the medico-legal certificates; one issued by Yashoda Hospital Pvt.Ltd. and the Government Medical Officer. Having placed both the certificates in juxtaposition, I find, there is no difference, or additions barring referring abrasion and causing CLS on brain, referred in the certificate issued - Yashoda Hospital. I find, Both the certificates match to each other. 4 CR.APL NO.606/2011 6. At this stage, it is difficult to contemplate that accusations could more be leaning to offense under Section 324 of IPC and seldom inviting infraction of Section 307 of IPC. Application lacks merit, dismissed. The observations are prima facie in nature. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/606-11crapl