1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4940 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. --- OF 2009 Hanmant Raghu Tarte ...Applicant vs. Kisan @ Krishna Dhondiba Kadam & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.M.S. Mohite for the Applicant. Mr.S.R. Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JUNE 24, 2010 P.C. :- 1 Heard Counsel for the applicant. 2 The applicant is challenging judgment and order passed by the trial court acquitting the respondents herein for the offence punishable under Sections 499, 500, 109 of the IPC. 3 In the complaint, it is alleged that the respondents had made an averment in the suit that 2 the applicant herein was strong and influential and that he had usurped the land of several people in the village. The trial court acquitted the respondents by holding that this case falls within Ninth Exception to the Section 499 of the IPC. 4 Counsel for the applicant submitted that the trial court had incorrectly accepted the defence of the respondents who had relied on averment made in some other case against the present applicant. 5 I have perused the judgment and order passed by the trial court. In my view, there is no infirmity in the judgment and order. The view taken by the trial court is a plausible view and as such, in my view, no case is made out for interfering with the said judgment and order passed by the trial court. 6 Leave, therefore, is refused. (V.M. KANADE, J.)