Criminal Application No. 153 of 2012. Case: Yamunabai Namdeo Dhumal Vs Ratnakar Vithoba Paymode and Ors. High Court of Bombay (India)

Case NumberCriminal Application No. 153 of 2012
CounselFor Applicant: S. N. Patil, N. V. Gaware, Advs. and For Respondents: N. C. Garud, N. B. Patil, A.P.P.
JudgesS. P. Davare, J.
IssueCriminal Procedure Code (2 of 1974) - Section 311
Citation2012 CriLJ 4768
Judgement DateSeptember 04, 2012
CourtHigh Court of Bombay (India)

Judgment:

  1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing with the consent of learned counsel for the parties finally.

  2. By the present application, preferred by the applicant (original complainant) under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he prayed that the impugned order, dated 21.9.2011, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parner in R.T.C. No. 159 of 2001 below Exh.91 be quashed and set aside and also prayed that the said application Exh.91 be allowed.

  3. The brief facts in nut shell, which gave rise to the present application, are as follows:-

    The applicant, who is the first informant, lodged the complaint/first information report against the respondents/accused on 2.9.2001, which was registered under C.R. No. I-212 of 2001 against the respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 37(1)(3) of the Bombay Police Act. It is alleged by the complainant therein that on 2.9.2001 the accused persons brutally assaulted her and resultantly she was injured seriously and copy of the said first information report is annexed herewith at Exh. 'A'.

  4. On the basis of the said first information report, R.T.C. No. 159 of 2001 was registered. The prosecution examined the applicant as P.W.1 on 4.10.2010 and she was subjected to cross-examination on 14.10.2010 and copy of the said deposition is annexed herewith at Exh. 'B'.

  5. Thereafter it appears that the prosecution examined about 5 witnesses. At this juncture, on 18.4.2011, A.P.P. preferred an application Exh. 91 before the learned Trial Court under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall the for re-examination for identification of the weapons. The respondents strongly opposed the said application by filing say at Exh.91, contending that the prosecution was trying to fill up the lacuna in evidence and was trying to create new evidence in the matter. Thereafter considering the rival submissions of the parties, the learned Trial Court rejected the said application by order, dated 21.9.2011 passed below Exh. 91. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order of rejection, the applicant has approached this Court by filing the present application for the prayers as set out hereinabove.

    5A. Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 resisted the present application vehemently and submitted that considering the contents of the application Exh.91 and also considering the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT