The State Of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Pandurang Dhuri And ORS.

1/4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.981 OF 2003 State of Maharashtra )....Appellant V/s.

Prabhakar Pandurang Dhuri & Ors.

)....Respondents ---- Ms.Pallavi Dabholkar APP for appellant.

Mr.A.S.Khandeparkar a/w Mr.Rajdeep Gawde i/by M/s.Khandeparkar & Associates for respondent nos.1 to 4.

[Mr.Sambhaji Patil-P.C.20, Kudal Police station, Sindhudurg present]. [Mr.Prabhakar Dhuri-respondent no.1 and Ms.Vijaya S.Dhuri for respondent no.3 present].

---- CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 22.1.2020 P.C. :- 1.

Mr.Khandeparkar for respondent nos.1 to 4 states that accused nos.1 & 3 are present in Court and identifies them. Mr.Khandeparkar states that the original complainant Bhalchandra Keshav Warang and the accused/respondents have decided to put an end to the dispute as it is almost 22 years old. Mr.Khandeparkar states that complainant also is about 75 years old and due to general debility, has not been able to come to court. 2.

Learned APP Ms.Dabholkar states her instructions are also that parties have decided to settle the matter and one of the charge which is under Section 325 of Indian Penal Code is compoundable. Learned APP tenders an affidavit filed by original complainant Bhalchandra Keshav Warang affirmed on 21.1.2020 before the

2/4 Assistant Superintendent, Civil Court, Kudal. Learned APP states that this was brought to her by Constable Sambhaji Patil, PC-20, Kudal Police station, Sindhudurg. Mr.Patil states in Marathi to the court that this affidavit was given to him by P.I.Kore, Kudal police station, incharge. The affidavit is taken on record and marked `X' for identification. For ease of reference, consent terms is scanned and reproduced as under :-

3/4

4/4 3.

I have to also note that this is an appeal against acquittal and therefore, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to the accused under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless they are proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured their acquittal, the presumption of their innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court. 4.

Learned APP states that in view of this affidavit, the State does not wish to prosecute the appeal and the court can dismiss the appeal.

5.

Appeal accordingly dismissed.

(K.R.SHRIRAM,J)