FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REV .APPLICATION NO.452 OF 2009 Dattu Khandu Shinde Vs. Jakir @ Pappu Adam Shaikh _____________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram, appearances, Court s orders : ’ or directions and Registrar s’ : Court s or Judge s orders ’ ’ orders : _____________________________________________________________________________________ Mr.Ujwal R. Agandsurve for applicant Mr.I.M.Khardi for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Mr.D.R.More, APP CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 4th February 2010. PC :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for parties. 2. This is a revision application by the original complainant applicant before me impugning – the order passed in Special Case No.21 of 2007 by the Ad hoc District Judge II and Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur acquitting the accused. 3. By the judgement delivered on 27th May 2009, the accused facing trial for the offences punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and section 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act and Section 353, 504 and 506 of IPC are acquitted. 4. The learned Judge has on appraisal of the oral and documentary evidence on record concluded that the prosecution could not bring home the charge of the complainant being abused in the name of his caste. When the complainant stepped into the box he spoke about the alleged abuses and insults but in the cross examination, admitted that he does not remember the date of the incident. In such circumstances, on his own version the prosecution failed to bring home the charge. 5. As far as the second aspect of the case of voluntarily causing hurt to the complainant and intentionally insulting him to provoke breach of public peace is concerned, even on that count the acquittal cannot be faulted. The witness examined including the complainant fairly admitted that the injured persons were not referred to any medical examination. Therefore, their version that the assault took place with sticks and the accused armed with the same arrived at the scene and started beating them has not been proved. 6. In revisional jurisdiction, it would not be permissible for me to re-appreciate and re- appraise these materials. More so, when neither any miscarriage of justice has been demonstrated nor perversity in the findings recorded. Consequently, the revision fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.)