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. 488 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant/ Appellant Vs. Shrikant Sadashiv Deshpande ..Respondent. Mr V.B. Konde, Deshmukh Advocate for the Applicant-Appellant. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND A.R. JOSHI,JJ. A.R. JOSHI,JJ. A.R. JOSHI,JJ. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY,2009. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY,2009. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY,2009. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. The allegations against the respondent were that while the complainant was alone in his house at about 13-15 hours (1:15 p.m.) on 19.11.2007, the accused came in the hall of the house of the complainant as front door of the house was open and on saying the complainant that he has committed theft of his money earlier and at that time he excused him but now he would not leave him on taking out sharp edged weapon like knife from his pocket, came on the person of the complainant and gave blow of the said weapon on his neck and caused him injury. 2. On the basis of the above allegations, charge sheet was filed and the accused was tried for an offence under Sections 307 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. During the cross-examination, the complainant stated that he does not remember about the incident of assaulting him. There was no quarrel between him and the accused. He lodged the complaint against the accused on suspicion as he was suspecting that the accused was putting outside latch of door of his house. Further, he has stated that he cannot tell who assaulted him. The Trial Court found that the complainant having not supported the case of the prosecution, the accused could not be convicted. 3. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere in the matter in which a view has been taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, was perhaps the only possible view, which could have been taken in view of the evidence produced by the prosecution. ( 3 ) 4. Criminal Application is hereby dismissed. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (BILAL NAZKI,J.) (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (BILAL NAZKI,J.) (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (BILAL NAZKI,J.)