Bombay High CourtAPEAL/280/1999dismissed for nonprosecutiondefault

Banobee Babbu Garve v. Abbu Hiru Garve And 4 Others

2015-02-02Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.R. Joshi2 pages

1 cri.a.280.99.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.280 OF 1999 [Banobee w/o Babbu Garve .vs. Babbu Hiru Garve and others] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : A.R. JOSHI, J.

DATED : FEBRUARY 02, 2015.

None present for the appellant-original complainant. Learned Advocate Mr. Kaplay represents the respondentsacquitted accused. Apparently, State of Maharashtra is not made a party in the present matter.

Though the present matter is filed earlier before this court and was accepted as an appeal challenging the judgment and order of acquittal of the respondents for the offences punishable under sections 323 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, there was no appeal preferred by the State, as the acquittal of the respondents was in a police case on the complaint lodged by the present appellant. In fact, there is no such provision of preferring appeal, at least still the amendment to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the victim, is provided. In any way, the present matter is required to be treated as a revision or a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, none present for the appellant-original complainant, who had preferred this matter challenging the order of acquittal of the present respondents. As per earlier order of this court dated 13.1.2014, by consent the matter was fixed on 27.1.2014. On said adjourned date, time was asked on behalf of the respondents. Thereafter,

2 cri.a.280.99.odt none remain present and the matter is taken today. As such, considering the scope of intervention not being an appeal and considering that none present from the complainant's side, the matter is dismissed for want of prosecution and accordingly disposed of.

[A.R. JOSHI, J.] Gulande