1 Appln 1040-2010 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1040 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .Applicant V/s. Nanasaheb alias Nikesh .Respondents Vasantrao Desai & ors Mrs.S.D.Shinde, APP, for the Applicant - State None for the Respondents CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 28TH JANUARY, 2011 P.C. . This is an application for leave to prefer an Appeal against Judgment of acquittal of the respondents rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, District Kolhapur on a conclusion of Sessions Case No.17 of 2008 before him. I have heard the learned APP for the State and with her help I have gone through copies of depositions of witnesses, who were examined at the trial. Victim Vaishali was daughter of one Shantaram Amrutrao Bhobhate, who was examined as P.W.2. 2 Appln 1040-2010 She was married to accused Nanasaheb alias Nikesh Vasantrao Desai on 7 th May, 2006. The allegation was that soon after the marriage there was some dispute between the parties about not making customary present on the occasion of the pooja. Nothing significant happened at the Diwali festival after the marriage. Four months thereafter, the victim's father allegedly received message from one Ashok Desai that Vaishali had been expelled from her matrimonial home. This Ashok Ramchandra Desai was examined as P.W.9. Victim's father accompanied by his relations had gone to the victim's matrimonial village. Ashok Desai P.W.9 stated that Vaishali's parents were not allowed to enter the house. Ashok Desai stated that he reasoned with the husband of Vaishali and returned to his home. It was also the prosecution case that victim's sisters visited her house at Shinoli where accused Nikesh had taken up a shop and at that time, the victim was beaten by Nikesh in 3 Appln 1040-2010 presence of her sisters. Thereafter, the alleged incident took place on 22 nd October, 2007 when victim's dead body was found in a well near the house. However, as observed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, most of the allegations about ill treatment were not to be found in the statements of the witnesses as allegedly recorded by the investigating officer. They had claimed to have stated about the various incidents to the police but admitted that such versions were not to be found in the police statement. 2. In view of this, it cannot be said that view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge was either perverse or untenable in exercise of Appellate jurisdiction by this Court. Leave refused. Appeal is dismissed. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)