8. cr appln 4778-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4778 OF 2010 Avinash Ashok Rokade .. Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr. Omprakash Pandey i/b M/s. Pandey & Co for the Applicant Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 27th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant-original accused no. 1 and learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking quashing of FIR I-42/2010 of Nasik Taluka Police Station. The said case is under Sections 307 and 325 read with 34 of IPC. 3. Learned advocate for the applicant contended that no case is made out under Sections 307 or 325 of IPC and he has drawn my attention to the medical certificates of two injured persons i.e the complainant- Parashram Gore and Lahanu Gore. 1 8. cr appln 4778-10.doc 4. In order to appreciate the controversy involved, it will be necessary to briefly state the facts of this case. The facts of this case as revealed from the FIR are that Parashram Gore was the sarpanch of Village Chandshi. On 28th August 2010 at about 8.30, he received telephone call from Chandshi village that some dispute was going on between Mohan Kenge and Avinash Rokade i.e the applicant, hence he went to the village on his motor cycle. He found crowd gathered near the Maruti temple. He saw the applicant along with three other persons i.e Vinod Sadu Rokade, Babu Sadu Rokade and Rakesh Pandit Shirsat were assaulting Mohan Kenge. When the complainant intervened, the accused persons who were in intoxicated condition got annoyed. The applicant assaulted the complainant on his head with sword due to which the complainant sustained bleeding injury. The other accused also assaulted the complainant on his thigh and backside by stick of spade. Lahanu Gore who had also intervened was assaulted by the accused on his head and backside by wooden stick. 5. Learned advocate for the applicant drew my attention to the injury certificate of Parshram Gore and Lahanu Gore which were issued by the Civil hospital. The certificate issued to Parshram shows that he has sustained two injuries, one is abrasion over the right chest and second is contusion. 2 8. cr appln 4778-10.doc However, the said certificate is illegible and it is not possible to make out the exact injury stated in the said certificate. As far as Lahanu Gore is concerned, the first injury is contusion over right forearm and the second injury is contusion and abrasion to his right shoulder. However, the prosecution is also relying on the certificate which is issued by Leelavati hospital which shows that the complainant was admitted in the hospital on 29th August 2010 at 11.30 am and he was discharged on 3rd September 2010 at 1.00 pm. The history given was that of assault and three injuries are mentioned in the said certificate i.e 4" CLW already sutured wound, 3 & 1/2" CLW already sutured wound on the left parietal region and 2" CLW already sutured wound on the left occipital region. This certificate clearly shows that Parshram has sustained injuries on the head which are grievous in nature. It is consistent with the statement of Parshram and the role attributed by him to the applicant. 6. As far as Lahanu Gore is concerned, reliance is placed by the prosecution on the medical certificate which shows that he was admitted in hospital on 29th August 2010 at 11.30 am with history of assault and he was discharged on 3rd September 2010. As to what importance is to be given to the certificate issued by the private hospital is an aspect which can only be gone at the time of the trial after the evidence 3 8. cr appln 4778-10.doc is led. The statement of the complainant shows that he was assaulted on the head with sword by the applicant. Medical certificate shows injuries on the head. Looking to this fact, prima facie case is made out under Section 307 of IPC, hence, no case is made out for quashing the FIR. 7. Application is rejected. 8. The trial Court shall not be influenced by any observations in this order while deciding the bail application or the trial. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 4 8. cr appln 4778-10.doc 5