Kailash Harakchand Jain v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 307 OF 2020 Mr. Kailash Harakchand Jain .....Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and anr.

.....Respondents * * * * Mr. Manish Bohra a/w. Mr. Ashish Dubey, Mr. Ujjwal Gandhi i/by. Mr. Anurag Ghag, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. A.D. Khamkhedkar, APP for State.

Coram : Sandeep K. Shinde, J.

Wednesday, 17 th November, 2021.

P.C. :

1.

The applicant is facing trial in Sessions Case No.57/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 427, 288, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

Pending trial, applicant moved an application seeking discharge from the case. The trial Judge declined

2/3 to discharge him; Whereafter the applicant questioned the trial Court's order, declining to discharge him in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition was dismissed on 3 rd August, 2017, and rejection order was confirmed by the Apex Court. Thereafter, the applicant moved an application under Section 216 of Criminal Procedure Code on 14 th March, 2018 seeking alteration of the charge framed under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code to Section 304A. That application was rejected on 7 th January, 2020.

Background facts :

3.

The applicant was conducting the jewellery business at Shops No.5 and 6 situate on the ground floor of Lakshmi Chaya, Borivali (West). On 18 th June 2007, the building partially collapsed. Apparently, the wall between Shops no.5 and 6 on the ground floor had been removed by the applicant while renovating his shop. This Court, while rejecting Writ Petition, in para-5 of the order, dealt with the report dated 23 rd July, 2007 obtained by the police from the Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai. This report, prima-facie, indicates reasons for collapse as; "alterations executed in the recent past in residential and commercial areas of the building

3/3 and "there was evidence of overloading of the structure resulting into progressive failure of the ground floor coloumns."

.

Evidence also suggest that, applicant illegally sliced the main pillar without permission during renovation of shop and caused loss to life and property. 4.

In consideration of the facts of the case and evidence on record, in my view, the order dated 7 th January, 2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, declining to alter the charge cannot be interfered with.

5.

The application is dismissed.

6.

The learned Sessions Court shall commence the trial within a month from today.

Digitally signed by NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT Date:

2021.11.20 13:07:36 +0530 NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT (Sandeep K. Shinde, J.)