: 1 : A-654-11=.doc USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 654 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.--OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant v/s. Sukhdeo Bhimrao Patil .. Respondent ......... Mr. V.B. Kondedeshmukh, APP for the State ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 7th JULY, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel Mr. Kondedeshmukh. The respondent faced trial in the Court of Special Judge, Sangli under Section 3(1)(x) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 r/w Section 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. 2. The learned Special Judge by order dated 12th August, 2009 acquitted the respondent from all the charges. Being aggrieved by the said judgment dated 12th August, 2009, the appeal has been filed by : 2 : A-654-11=.doc the State and application is filed seeking leave to file the appeal. I have heard learned Counsel Mr. Kondedeshmukh. PW-1 - Shashikant is the person to whom some reference was made in the public meeting regarding his caste and the ability of person belonging to the said caste to do certain work. PW-1 Shashikant has lodged FIR on 22nd September, 2008 i.e. after about 24 hours of the incidence. This aspect has been considered by the learned trial Judge against the State by observing that there is a delay in filing the complaint. This finding is required to be gone into. 3. PW-1 Shashikant has narrated as to how the incidence took place and as to how he asked the question in the meeting. Learned trial Judge went into the said aspect and has come to the conclusion that it was impossible that such question could be asked in the meeting by PW-1 Shashikant. 4. Learned Special Judge misdirected himself. He could not have gone into the aspects as to how such question could be asked. He should have appreciated the evidence which was on record and then arrived at finding. Record shows that PW-2 and PW-3 have given evidence in line with evidence given by PW-1 Shashikant. In my view, it would be necessary to go into the relevant aspects as to why the : 3 : A-654-11=.doc learned trial Judge gave a finding in favour of the respondent by holding that such a question could not have been asked. 5. Hence, Criminal Application is granted. Appeal is admitted. Issue notice to respondent. Call for record and proceedings. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)