Bombay High Court
Sau. Jamuna Ashok Awachar vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. P.S. ... on 7 July, 2017
Author: V. M. Deshpande
Bench: V. M. Deshpande
1 revn154.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION NO.154/2016
Sau. Jamuna Ashok Awchar,
aged 30 years, Occ. Household work,
r/o Malegaon, Tq. Malegaon,
Dist. Washim. .....APPLICANT
...V E R S U S...
State of Maharashtra, through
Police Station Officer, Police Station
Malegaon, Dist. Washim. ...NON APPLICANT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. S. V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicant.
Ms T. Udeshi, A.P.P. for non applicant.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- 07.07.2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Rule is returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.
2. A crime was registered vide Crime No. 230/2015 for the offence punishable under Section 354-A, 294, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The FIR was registered with Police Station, Malegaon on the report lodged by the victim girl. After investigation, the final report is already filed before the Court of law. In the charge-sheet, the present applicant is shown as accused no.2.
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:20:39 :::
2 revn154.16.odt Admittedly, the present applicant is step mother of the victim who resides away from her real mother and her father is also one of the accused in the crime.
After completion of the investigation, since according to the present applicant, there was no evidence against the present applicant, the application for discharge was filed before the learned Additional District Judge, Washim. The said application was filed below Exh.-18. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim on 30.08.2010, allowed the application for discharge and accordingly the applicant was discharged from Section 12 of the POCSO Act and Section 354-A and 294 of the IPC. However, it is directed that the trial should proceed against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 506 of the IPC.
Feeling aggrieved by the order not discharging the applicant completely, the applicant is before this Court.
3. The learned A.P.P. has submitted that the charge is already framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Section 323 and 506 of the IPC.
::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:20:39 :::
3 revn154.16.odt
4. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, I have gone through the FIR dated 30.12.2015 filed by the victim. There are no allegations of whatsoever nature against the applicant. Only a vague statement is there that if the victim is not leaving the house of the present applicant, she will be done to death.
The learned A.P.P. could not point out any other material to show that the applicant can be held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC.
5. In that view of the matter, this is a fit case wherein this Court should exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. Hence, the revision is allowed. The applicant stands discharged from Sessions Trial No.36/2016 pending on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Washim. The applicant is discharged of the offence punishable under Section 323 and 506 of the IPC.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.
JUDGE kahale ::: Uploaded on - 11/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:20:39 :::