THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs JANARDHAN LADKU BHOIR AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

LSP 1 apeal 1574.04.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.1574 of 2004 The State of Maharashtra … Appellant (Orig. Complainant) V/s. 1. Janardhan Ladku Bhoir 2. Shridhar Ladku Bhoir 3. Bharat Ladku Bhoir 4. Sudham Namdeo Patil 5. Bharat Namdeo Patil 6. Vijay Maruti Bhoir 7. Rakesh Makhniddin Yadav … Respondents. (Orig. Accused Nos.1 to 7) LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Ms. R.S. Tendulkar APP for the State. Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date: 2025.07.04 CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J 18:28:43 +0530 DATE : 27th June 2025. ORAL JUDGMENT : The Appeal is already admitted on 9 th January 2006. Notice is duly served on Respondent Nos. 1 to 7-original accused. This Appeal is LSP 2 apeal 1574.04.doc against judgment of acquittal by the Court of First Ad hoc Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.83/2004. The offences are under Section 3(1)(x) of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short SC and ST Act) and under Section 147, 323,325 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. After trial all were acquitted. Even though there is no appearance on behalf of Respondents, as the Appeal is very old, I have heard learned APP. She has taken me through the evidence of 13 witnesses and the impugned judgment. The prosecution case is as follows: There is A Gram Panchayat by name Vadape in Bhiwandi Taluka, Thane District. The first informant PW No.1-Nitin Pandurang Gaikwad was elected as a Sarpanch from the reserved category whereas Respondent No.1-Janardhan was a Vice Sarpanch. He and other members are from Agri community. They were not keeping good terms with the first informant-Nitin. They had grievance that first informant- Nitin was not fulfilling his responsibility towards th