Ku. Vaishali D/O. Dayalu Dighore v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Ashti Dist. Wardha

apeal256.18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.256/2018 Ku. Vaishali d/o Dayalu Dighore .vs. State of Maharashtra through PSO P.S. Ashti, Wardha.

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Mr. R. S. Nayak, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. S. S. Doifode, A.P.P.for non applicant-State. CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATED : OCTOBER 11, 2019 Heard Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for appellant and Mr. Doifoce, learned A.P.P. for respondent-State. Aresent appeal arises out of judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Special Judge for POCSO Act, Wardha dated 11.01.2018. By the impugned judgment, present appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 21 (2) of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act and was directed that she shall suffer simple imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-,in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days.

On 11.04.2019, this appeal was admitted and substantive jail sentence imposed upon applicant was also suspended and she was released on bail.

Be that as it may, in Special (Child) Case No. 77/2015, death sentence was inflicted upon accused Raju alias Rajkumar Keshavrao Landge. Learned Special Judge made a reference for confirmation of death sentence of the said accused. Similarly, accused also filed an appeal. The

apeal256.18.odt confirmation case was registered as Confirmation Case No.1/2018. Said confirmation case was registered before the Division Bench of this Court and vide judgment dated 26.10.2018, death sentence was not confirmed. At the same time, the Division Bench remitted back the matter for de novo trial. In paragraph 46 of judgment, the Division Bench observed as under:

"The conviction of other accused persons viz. Madan Lahanu Khadse, the Headmaster and Ku.

Vaishali Dayalu Dighore, the Hostel Superintendent, is connected with the conviction of accused Raju and hence their conviction also cannot be sustained in the Confirmation Case. We set aside the same."

Office has placed a note before me in which the aforesaid fact is brought to my notice. However, it appears that due to inadvertence, the present criminal appeal was not tagged along with Confirmation case and present appeal has remained pending.

As per office note and even as per submissions of Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for appellant, after the matter being remanded for de novo trial, the trial has commenced. Mr. Nayak further submits that even present appellant is also participating in the de novo trial before the trial Court. In that view of the matter, nothing survives in the present appeal. The appeal is therefore disposed of. JUDGE kahale