Bhupendra S/O Puran Parbate And 2 Others vs State Of Mha. Thr. Pso Gobrwahi ... on 20 August, 2025

[Cites 13, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Bhupendra S/O Puran Parbate And 2 Others vs State Of Mha. Thr. Pso Gobrwahi ... on 20 August, 2025

In this application, the prayer is to quash the Charge-sheet being No.46/2020, filed against the applicants and others, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 353, 324, 341, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 109 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 (for short, "the Act of 2013").

2. We have heard Mr. K.S. Motwani, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. K.R. Lule, learned A.P.P. for non-applicant No.1, and Mr. Saurabh Singha, learned counsel appointed to represent non-applicant No.2.

3. We have gone through the statements of the witnesses. One of the relevant statements is at page No.409.

961.APL.995.2022.odt 2/5

The witness referred to the incident of 21st July, 2020. She heard an announcement that there will be a special meeting near Hanuman Mandir of the village at 7:00 p.m., and all the villagers were requested to attend the same. While she was returning back home at 6:00 p.m., one of the villagers asked her to get ready to attend the meeting. He also referred to the black magic performed on one lady, who had been to the house in an unconscious state of mind. The meeting was attended by various persons, including the applicants. They blamed three persons, namely Kundan Goupale, Omprakash Meshram and Kachru Raut for performing black magic on the wife of Yogesh Chopkar. One person, namely Omprakash Meshram was beaten. The witness called the police.

4. Thereafter, the witness referred to the incident under question which occurred on 25th July, 2020. At about 8:30 p.m., she heard the voice of her neighbour Kundan Goupale. She noticed that number of persons, including the applicants, were carrying sticks in their hands. They abused the witness because she called police the other day. She witnessed that these people were involved in fighting and have later on assaulted the aforesaid three persons allegedly involved in black magic. Their cloths were torn and they were assaulted by fist blows, chappals and sticks. They were tied by rope. Kerosene was poured on their person. The crowd was about to set them on fire when the rain started. After some time, police gathered and took the victims with them. The crowd intercepted police as well and made an attempt to prevent 961.APL.995.2022.odt 3/5 them from removing the aforesaid three persons. Police somehow managed to pacify the thing and removed the injured to the hospital. This is how the incident has been narrated.

5. The argument is that these are general allegations and no specific role is assigned to the applicants.

6. What we find from the statement of this witness is that the incident has some history. Four days prior to the incident, the villagers held a meeting. They blamed three persons of performing black magic. The villagers were all agitated. One person, namely Omprakash Meshram, was beaten. Thereafter, on 25th July, 2020, applicants and others were seen carrying wooden stick with them. They abused the witness for calling police on 21st July, 2020. The witness had seen these people, which includes applicants, beating the three persons named above. They were beaten by fist blows, stick and chappals. They were tied by rope. The crowd poured kerosene on them and were all set to set them ablaze.

7. Such set of facts indicates that the applicants have played a vital role in the incident. Though a specific allegation by name is not made, there is a collective role played by the persons, who gathered at the spot. They all had gathered with same object and motive, which was to eliminate the persons allegedly responsible for black magic. Had rains not appeared, they probably would have succeeded in their mission. In the circumstances, without giving opportunity to the prosecution to 961.APL.995.2022.odt 4/5 prove the allegations against the applicants by permitting witnesses to lead evidence, one cannot jump to the conclusion that the offence is not made out against the applicants.

8. Apart from above witness, there are other witnesses as well who may not have referred to the name of the applicants, but have in clear terms narrated the incident. These witnesses may identify the applicants, who belong to the same village, and therefore are known to the witnesses. The applicants carry a blame of collective mission and therefore whether or not they have physically assaulted the victims, they would carry joint responsibility of committing offence in terms of Section 149 of the IPC. It cannot be, therefore, said that the offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code are not made out.

9. So far as the offence punishable under Section 3(2) of the Act of 2013 is concerned, it provides that commission of any act of human sacrifice and other inhuman, evil and aghori practices and black magic by any person by himself or through any other person shall constitute an offence under the provisions of this Act.

10. We have gone through the statements of the witnesses. None of the witnesses have spelt out the ingredients of Section 3(2) of the Act of 2013. What has been said by the witnesses is that the three persons had practised black magic on the wife of Yogesh Chopkar. Thus, the witnesses believed that black magic was performed. There is, however, no evidence in 961.APL.995.2022.odt 5/5 support. Accordingly, we called upon the learned A.P.P. to show us any material to substantiate the said charge, to which the learned A.P.P. fairly concedes that there is no such evidence available.

11. That being so, the charge-sheet, to the extent of offence punishable under Section 3(2) of the Act of 2013, is liable to be quashed.

12. Accordingly, the application is partly allowed. The Charge-sheet being No.46/2020, to the extent of offence punishable under Section 3(2) of the Act of 2013, is quashed and set aside.

13. The application is disposed of in above terms.

14. The fees of appointed counsel be quantified and paid as per Rules.

                                          (M. M. NERLIKAR, J.)                (ANIL L. PANSARE, J.)

                                  Vijaykumar




Signed by: Mr. Vijay Kumar
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 22/08/2025 16:26:13

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court