in the court of judicial magistrate (f c) bhokardan dist. jalna ...

21 The accused is facing the trial for offences punishable u/s325, 323, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code.2 The brief facts giving rise to the prosecution case as under.The informant Vitthal Telange is resident of village Walsawangi.On 10/03/2007 at about 5­35 p.m. the informant was recollected thepulses in front of his home. At that time the accused Bala came thereand abused him. The informant ask the accused as to why he hasabused him. At that time accused beat him by means of stick on hisleft hand. Due to which the informant sustained grivious injury to hishand. It is the further case of prosecution that accused abused thecomplainant and threatened him to kill. The qurral was intervene byone Hari Telange. After then the informant Vitthal has lodged thereport in the Paradh Police Station. Accordingly the Paradh policehave registered the crime as N.C.No. 57/07, u/s 323, 504, 506 of IndianPenal Code and the case is handed over to Police Head Constable M.

3G. Choudhary for further investigation.3 The Investigation Officer during his investigation visitedthe spot of incident and carried out spot panchanama. He recorded thestatements of witnesses. He arrested the accused. The InvestigationOfficer has collected the injury certificate of informant Vitthal. TheInvestigation Officer during his investigation found that the accusedhave committed an offence. Therefore he send the chargesheet to theCourt.4 My learned predecessor has framed the charge against theaccused vide Exh.8. The contents of charge were read over andexplained to the accused in vernacular to which he pleaded not guiltyand claimed to be tried.5 To prove the guilt of accused the prosecution has examinedas 3 witnesses.The informant Vitthal has filed application forcompounding the case. However the accused is charged with offence

4punishable u/s 506 which is not compoundable, therefore theapplication at Exh. 20 for compounding the offence is rejected.6 The statement of accused u/s 313 Code of CriminalProcedure is recorded vide Exh. 26. The defence of accused is of totaldenial.7 Considering the case of prosecution, the evidence lead bythe prosecution and also examination of accused u/s 313 Code ofCriminal Procedure, the following point are arise for my determination, which are as follows with my findings and reason there to.PointsFindings.1 Does prosecution prove that on In The Negative10/03/07 at about 5.35 p.m. atvillage Walsawangi the accusedinvoluntarily cause grevious hurtto complainant Vitthal. ?2 Does prosecution further prove that In The Negativeon 10/03/07 at about 5.35 p.m. at

6complainant has filed pursis stating that he does not wants to leadfurther evidence at Exh. 25.9 It is case of prosecution on 10/03/07 at about 5.35 pm atvillage Walsawangi the accused beaten the complainant by means ofstick on his hand and also the accused abused the complainant andthreatened him to kill. The informant PW1 Vitthal deposed that heknow the accused. The incident took place prior to 2 years ago nearthe public water supply connection. At that time he proceed by Cycleand he fall down and his hand was broken. The informant PW1 Vitthalhas not supported to the prosecution case. The learned A.P.P. for statecrossed him at length. However during the cross examination on behalf of state the PW1 Vitthal does not support to the prosecution. Onthe contrary he plainly denied the prosecution story.The PW1deposed on oath that accused Sandu has not beaten him by means of