rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 385 OF 1996 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 385 OF 1996 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 385 OF 1996 The State of Maharashtra ] .. Appellant Vs. Vijay Chandrabhan Gaikwad ] Age 25 years ] Occupation - Agriculture, ] Residing at Post Yeola, ] Taluka Yeola, ] District - Nashik. ] .. Respondent Ms.A.T.Javeri, A.P.P.for State. Mr.P.N.Kurlekar for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S.Oka, J. CORAM : A.S.Oka, J. CORAM : A.S.Oka, J. DATED : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 DATED : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 DATED : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 JUDGMENT :- JUDGMENT :- JUDGMENT :- . Heard the learned A.P.P. for the Appellant and learned counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. This is an appeal against the order of acquittal dated 18th January, 1996. By the impugned Judgment and order, the learned Special Judge, Nashik acquitted the Respondent of charges under section 3(1),(X) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes ( 2 ) (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with section 7(1) (d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 as well as under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The learned A.P.P. appearing for the Appellant has taken me through the notes of evidence, exhibited documents and the impugned Judgment. The learned A.P.P submitted that the caste certificate issued by the Executive Magistrate was produced by the prosecution and it shows that the caste of the complainant was Hindu-Mahar. She submitted that the prosecution case could not have been thrown out on the ground that there was an inordinate delay in production of caste certificate. She invited my attention to the statement of accused recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in which the Respondent accused admitted the caste of the complainant. She submitted that only one conclusion can be drawn from the evidence adduced by the prosecution and the said conclusion is of the guilt of the accused. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent supported the Judgment and order. ( 3 ) 4. I have perused the record. I find that in the FIR lodged by the complainant at Exh.16, he has not disclosed that he belongs to the category of Schedule Caste or that his caste is Hindu-Mahar. In the complaint he has also not disclosed that the Respondent is Hindu Maratha by caste. This lacuna goes to the root of the matter. In view of the settled law, the cognizance of the offence under the said Act of 1989 could not even taken on the basis of such F.I.R. 5. Apart from this fact, the learned Judge found that the officer who had issued the caste certificate dated 4th January, 1996 in favour of the complaint had no authority to issue the caste certificate and that the same was not verified by the Cast Scrutiny Committee. 6. Apart from recording the aforesaid findings which are borne out by the record, the learned Special Judge has considered the entire evidence on record. After having perused the entire evidence, I find that the conclusion recorded by the learned Special Judge, ( 4 ) Nashik is a possible conclusion. This is not a case where impugned order can be said to be perverse. Even assuming that another view is possibly to be taken on the basis of the evidence, that is no ground to interfere in an Appeal against acquittal. There is no merits in the Appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. The Bail bond of the Respondent stands cancelled. (A.S.Oka, J.) (A.S.Oka, J.) (A.S.Oka, J.)