1 appln 5127 of 2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5127 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant -versus Anil Pandurang Kirdat .. Respondents. Mr. J. P. Kharge, APP for the Applicant State CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 27th June, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application forleave tofile appeal against acquittal of respondent for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) and (vi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 7(1)(d) and (b) and 10 of Protection of Civil Rights Act and under Sections 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, rendered by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Sangli. The prosecution had examined in all 6 witnesses at the trial. P.W.1 was the first informant himself. P.W.2 was witness of spot panchnama, who did not support the prosecution. P.W.3 Utkarsa Shinde is eye witness. P.W.4 Amol Tambe, was Investigating officer. P.W.5 is Dr. J. S Patil who examined first informant and found contused lacerated wound over lip. P.W.6 was the employee of bank where first informant was serving, who was examined to show that the first informant was on leave on the relevant day. 2 appln 5127 of 2010 2. This evidence in respect of incident is of only two witnesses i.e. first informant and Utkarsha Shinde. The learned Judge found that the evidence was unreliable. The incident had taken place on 27th December, 2009 at 12.30 p.m. near the bus stop in a village. Therefore, it is curious that only one eye witness was available. Utkarsha Shinde, who supported the case has admitted that her mother is Sarpanch of village since two years. She is one from political camp opposed to accused. In her examination in chief, she states that by chance she had been to the spot at the time of incident. She did not deny political rivalry. Her father had held various offices in the Co-operative Society in the village. The accused seems to have filed several complaints about corruption against the office bearers of Gram Panchayat. P.W.3 Utkarsha admitted that her mother who was Sarpanch of the village had to file application for anticipatory bail in a matter. In view of this it cannot be said that the learned Judge erred in refusing to rely on such words of interested witnesses. Leave refused. Appeal dismissed. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)