1 (APPLN983.11) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.983 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra .... Applicant. V/s Ananda Ganu Narute & Ors. .... Respondents. Mr. V.R. Bhosale, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE & A.M. THIPSAY, JJ DATE : 10th October, 2011 P.C.:- 1. This application for leave to file appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Sessions Judge who, by his order dated 77/5/2011, was pleased to acquit respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (original accused Nos. 1 to 3) of the offence punishable under sections 302, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22/6/2010, at about 5.00 a.m, dead body of Dada Ganu Narute was found hanging on the branch of neem tree which was situated in 2 (APPLN983.11) the field of Shri Ramdas Bapu Narute. According to the prosecution, respondents had murdered Dada Narute and had dragged his body and, thereafter, his body was hanged with the help of nylon rope which was initially tied around the trunk of the tree. Prosecution case is that there was a dispute over ancestral joint family properties between the accused and Dada Narute and other members of his family and though the said dispute was settled, some altercation had taken place between the accused and family members of Dada Narute and, therefore, the accused murdered him in the night between 21.6.2010 and 22.6.2010. 3. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has taken us through the impugned judgment and order of the Trial Court and also through the notes of evidence which are annexed to the leave application. 4. According to the prosecution, deceased Dada Narute used to sleep in the courtyard outside his house on the wooden plank and in the morning of 22.6.2010 at about 5.00 A.M., his son saw the dead body hanging from a neem tree. FIR was registered and the police found dragged marks up to neem tree. Trial Court has observed that though the prosecution had established that there was some enmity between between the deceased and his family members and the accused on account of joint ancestral properties it came to the conclusion that there was no material to show that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 had committed the said offence. 3 (APPLN983.11) Though one of the witnesses tried to suggest that the rope which was found on the person of the deceased belonged to the accused, the defence succeeded in proving that this statement which was made in the court was an improvement. Trial Court, therefore, was fully justified in holding that benefit of doubt ought to have been given to respondents/accused. 5. Trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence on record and has given appropriate reasons for coming to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to establish its case beyond the reasonable doubt. Leave, therefore, is refused. Appeal does not survive. 6. Application is disposed of. (A.M.THIPSAY, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) 4 (APPLN983.11)