appln1266.09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1266 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. ................ OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ....Applicant. Vs. Ashok Mukund Randive & 6 Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. Mr. J.B. Kocheta for Respondent No. 1,2, 4 to 7. Mr. Amin Solkar for Respondent No. 3. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 11th June, 2010 P.C.: 1 This is an Application filed by the State of Maharashtra under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, Cr.P.C.) for seeking leave to appeal against the order of acquitted passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Pune on 16/02/2008 in Sessions Case No. 289 of 2005. 2 We have perused the reasoning set out in the said order and we are satisfied that leave to appeal deserves to be granted. 3 Hence, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). 4 Appeal is admitted. 5 Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 are the Police personnel. Accused Dasharath appln1266.09.sxw 2 Suryabhan Thorat was produced before the Court along with Kailash Netke on 24/02/2004 by the Railway Police and both of them escaped from the custody of the Railway Police. C.R. No. 84 of 2004 came to be registered with the Deccan Police Station as the Court premises were within the jurisdiction of the said police station. Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 were attached to the Khadki Police Station at the relevant time and Respondent No. 7 is a businessman dealing with scrap material. On 25/02/2004, accused Dashrath Thorat was seen near the river side and was chased and while catching him he was assaulted by bamboo, wooden loft, wire, as well as kick and fist blows. He was taken to Sasoon Hospital for medical examination and was thereafter kept in the lock-up of Khadki Police Station. Accused Dasharath died on 26/02/2004 and A.D. No. 17/2004 came to be registered. Investigation was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Shri Gawali. FIR No. 109/2004 was registered for the offences punishable under Section 302, 384, 325, 218 read with Section 34 of the IPC, on the very same day i.e. on 26/02/2004 against the present Respondents. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Sessions Court and registered as Sessions Case No. 289 of 2005. By the impugned order the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune has acquitted accused Nos. 1 to 6 solely on the ground that sanction under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. was not obtained. 6 Mr. Adsule, learned APP, has relied upon the decision in the case of Choudhury Parveen Sultana Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr., (2009) 3, appln1266.09.sxw 3 S.C.C. 398 in support of his contentions that the sanction envisaged under Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. was not required. Whereas, Mr. Solkar, learned advocate appearing for Respondent No.3 relied upon the decision in the case of Sankaran Moitra Vs. Sadhna Das & Anr. (2006) 4, S.C.C. 584. 7 Thus, the Appeal involves a legal point to be decided by us. Therefore, it would be expedient that the Appeal is heard peremptorily. 8 Hence, list the Appeal for final hearing on 27th July, 2010 at 3.00 p.m. Call for R & P, so as to ensure that it will reach the Registry of this Court on or before 3rd July, 2010. Paper book dispensed with. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)