1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2218 of 2009 IN Criminal Appeal No. of 2009 [The State of Mah. Vs. Aslam Shah Suleman Shah & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mrs. K. Joshi, APP for the appellant. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 16th April, 2010. 1. Heard learned APP Mrs. K. Joshi. 2. Perused the judgment. 3. The Judgment of acquittal is challenged, inter alia, by raising a ground, which reads as follows:- “vi) That the learned Lower Court erred in holding that the prosecution has not examined the Medical Officer, as the Trial Court himself rejected the application of issuing witness summons to the Medical Officer.” 4. Perusal of Judgment reveals that the acquittal is based on four circumstances, namely:- [a] Failure to prove the injuries by examining the doctor, i.e., Medical Witness. 2 [b] Failure to recover the weapon of assault and produce it before the Court. [c] Parties – accused and the complainant have enmity and cross-cases are pending. [d] Two independent witnesses, who were available, have not been examined. 5. Since acquittal is based on many reasons and not the sole ground of failure to examine the Medical Witness, it is not necessary to give any special weightage to the fact that the Court had declined to issue summons to Medical Witness. 6. Moreover, State has not come forward with entire record indicating as to how there was no delay or laches on the part of the prosecution in applying for issuance of summons to medical witness. 7. In this background, appeal does not merit any indulgence, and is rejected. Judge |Hedau| 3