1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.163/2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. /2009 (The State of Maharashtra .vrs. Bhaurao alias Pintya Sukhadeo Kopnar) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 26, 2010. Heard Mr. A.M. Deshpande, learned APP for the applicant/appellant. By this application the applicant seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 16.5.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Trial No.54/2008 acquitting the accused/respondent of the offences under Sections 376, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution in the intervening night of 19.5.2008 and 20.5.2008 the accused committed rape on deceased Shobha Pandurang Kachare and thereafter committed her murder and in order to cause disappearance of the evidence poured poison on the body of deceased. In the course of trial the prosecution examined ten witnesses and produced several documents to prove the offences against the accused. The trial court, upon 2 appreciation of evidence, held that offences alleged against the accused were not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Perusal of the impugned judgment discloses that there is absolutely no evidence either direct or circumstantial to connect the accused with the crime. No doubt, deceased Shobha was carrying pregnancy of six months and it was the prosecution case that deceased Shobha was pregnant from the accused but the same was denied by the accused. The prosecution did not lead any evidence that the deceased was below 16 years of age. The prosecution has not led any evidence to prove motive by leading any cogent evidence. There is no cogent evidence placed on record by the prosecution to prove the offences against the accused. In any event the findings recorded by the trial court while acquitting the accused/respondent cannot be said to be perverse warranting interference by this court with the order of acquittal. In view of the above, we find no merit in the present application. Hence, the application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Gulande