-:1:- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 687 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO. 687 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO. 687 OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra. ... Applicant. V/s. Ramchandra Vitthal Nale. ... Respondent. Mrs. A.A. Mane, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. V.S. Talkute for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. DATE DATE DATE : 30TH JULY, 2008. : 30TH JULY, 2008. : 30TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Heard learned Advocate. 2. On 7th October 2005 at about 14.00 hours at village Hanmantwadi, Taluka - Phaltan, District - Satara, the complainant found that the Accused had taken legal electricity connection, on his well for water pump. Further, the Accused has also taken from that cut-out two illegal connection, as from that cut-out by two wires up to his house and has illegally used electricity without making charges. The Complainant cut the said wire as they were without any authority and as per the prosecution at such stage, when the complainant with other officers Mr. Shinde and Mr. Randive reached to the house of the Accused, the Accused come out of his house and asked the complainant abusing by his caste. There is nothing to show that there was earlier acquaintance of the -:2:- complainant with the accused to know caste of the complainant. 3. That apart, the learned Sessions Judge in paragraph 9 of his Judgment has observed that there is no caste certificate produced by the prosecution on record. Those findings cannot be disputed. Though, the learned A.P.P. tried to canvass such copy of caste certificate was produced by the complainant. The investigation was carried by PW-6 S.B. Jadhav. He did not assign the same to his superior officer, considering the nature of the allegations. The accused was also prosecuted for the offence under Section 353, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. The delay in lodging the report at the instance of the complainant is not explained. On the other hand, the learned Judge found that there was deliberations between the complainant and the office colleagues and then the F.I.R. against the accused came to be lodged. 4. In the above set of facts, leave to appeal refused. (K.U. (K.U. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.)