..(1).. 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 APPLICATION NO.1401 OF 2007 [LEAVE TO APPEAL] IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Versus Balaso Yashwant Olekar and 2 Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP, for the Applicant-State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. DATED : 3rd June, 2008. P.C.: 1. The applicant-State of Maharashtra has filed this application for leave to file appeal against the judgment and order dated 11th January, 2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sangli in Special Case No.7 of 2006. By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents-orig. accused Nos.1 to 3 of the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Sections 325, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. ..(2).. 2. The case of the complainant is that on 13th February, 2006 at about 9:00 a.m. the accused Nos.1 to 3 abused him referring to his caste and all three assaulted him. Thereafter he went to the police station and lodged his complaint. 3. I have heard the learned APP for the Applicant-State. Perused the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge as well as the evidence which has been produced by the learned APP. 4. According to the complainant, he was at the police station from 11:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. and thereafter he was referred to Primary Health Centre and he went to the Primary Health Centre at 4:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.. From the evidence, it is seen that the complaint is registered at 15:35 hrs. on 13.2.2006. However, the medical papers and the evidence of the doctor show that the complainant was at the Primary Health Centre at 12 noon. He was examined at 12:00 noon and certificate came to be issued accordingly. This discrepancy creates a doubt about the prosecution ..(3).. case. Moreover, the present case is under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and it is seen that the investigation is not conducted by the competent officer as is required under the Act. It is on these grounds that the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the respondents-accused. 5. Looking to the evidence on record, I am of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasonable and possible view. Hence, no interference is called for. Application for leave to file appeal is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)