:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3004 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.3004 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.3004 OF 2007 IN IN IN CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. APPEAL NO. APPEAL NO. OF OF OF 2007 2007 2007 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicants V/s Sanjay Narayan Gangurde ..Respondent Smt. S.D. Shinde,APP for the State Mr.V.V. Purwant for the respondent CORAM CORAM CORAM : R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR AND : R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR AND : R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR AND A.A. A.A. A.A. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 29TH JANUARY, 2008 : 29TH JANUARY, 2008 : 29TH JANUARY, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard. By the present application, the applicants are seeking to challenge the judgment dated 15th May, 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.432 of 2005. By the impugned judgment the respondent has been acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and under section 3 r/w section 25 (c) of the Arms Act. 2. There is no direct evidence about the commission of the offence by the respondent. The allegations of commission of murder was based on circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence :2: comprises of sole testimony of the father of the deceased. It was the allegation of the father of the deceased that the accused had illicit relations with the wife of the deceased. The allegation is based solely on the basis of some photographs, wherein the accused is seen in company of the wife of the deceased. However, nothing objectionable could be seen in any of those photographs. Merely because one person is seen in company with a lady that itself cannot lead to the conclusion that these persons had illicit relations with each other, more particularly in a situation where the persons are either relatives or the members of the group of friends. Undisputedly evidence on record discloses friendly relationship between the deceased and the accused. As far as allegation of violation of the provisions of Arms Act are concerned, undisputely no sanction as required under section 39 of the Arms Act was obtained prior to initiating the prosecution. Considering all these aspects, the trial Court having found absence of any cogent and reliable evidence in support of the allegations against the respondent, has ordered acquittal of the respondent. The finding has been arrived at in that regard after proper analysis of :3: the evidence on record and we do not find any infirmity therein. There is absolutely no case for interference in the impugned judgment and therefore, the application for leave to appeal is rejected. (R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J) (R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J) (R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J) ( A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.)