-:1:- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra. ... Applicant. V/s. Balasaheb @ Pintya Appaso Gavli & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, A.P.P.for the State. None for the Respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & K.U. K.U. K.U. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 16TH APRIL, 2008. : 16TH APRIL, 2008. : 16TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The learned Magistrate by his order dated 7.8.2006 was pleased to convict all the three accused for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 323 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused were acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 504 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Aggrieved by the order, the accused preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Court. The Additional Sessions Judge, Jaysingpur by his order dated 16.10.2007 was pleased to acquit the accused and consequently this application. 3. We have heard learned A.P.P. We have with the assistant of the A.P.P. gone through the order of the learned Sessions Judge. It is rightly noted by the -:2:- learned Sessions Judge that there are several inconsistencies in the case of the prosecution which is not explained. Apart from this, the panch witnesses also turned hostile. 4. In our opinion, considering the discussion of evidence by the learned Sessions Judge, we do not find this to be a fit case for granting the leave to appeal and the application is rejected. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) (K.U. (K.U. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.)