1 cri­apln­5097­10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. APPLICATION NO. 5097 OF 2010 (For Leave to Appeal) IN CRI. APPEAL NO. OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant Vs. Raju Rama Tapare and Anr. ..Respondents .... Mr. H.J.Dedhia Additional Public Prosecutor for the State .... CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Criminal Appeal is questioning the validity of the judgment and order dated 7.7.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Sangli in Sessions Case No. 180 of 2009 whereby both the respondents came to be acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 341 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2 cri­apln­5097­10 2 The prosecution has examined P.W. 4 Savitri (complainant and wife of the deceased) as well as P.W. 6 Baida to establish the fact of deceased last seen together with the respondents on 18.8.2009 at about 4.30 p.m. Similarly, there is another circumstance about the recovery of weapon Sattur at the instance of the respondent no.2 Dattatraya and there was blood on the clothes of the respondents. The evidence of discovery of these articles was discarded by the trial Court on flimsy ground that the P.W. 1 Nitin was unable to state the boundaries of the house of the accused no.1 Raju. Considering the evidence of these witnesses coupled with the evidence of other prosecution witnesses, we are of the view that the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court so far as respondent no.1 Raju is concerned, is just and proper and is also sustainable in law and therefore, appeal against the respondent no.1 stands dismissed. So far as respondent no. 2 is concerned, leave granted. Appeal admitted. Action under Section 390 of Code of Criminal Procedure be taken respondent no.2. [ D.D.SINHA, J.] [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]