THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR POLICE STATION OFFICER PSO PS POFALI, TAH. UMARKHED, DIST. YAVATMAL v. SHARAD TUKARAM HADSE AND ANOTHER
APPA/120/2025 · 2026-09-04
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4285 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4285 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.120 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL STAMP NO.1474 OF 2020 State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station Pofali, Tah. Umarkhed Dist. Yavatmal .Vs. Sharad Tukaram Hadse and another __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr V.A. Thakare, APP for the applicant. Mr Atharva C. Khadse, Adv. (appointed) for the respondent Nos.1 and 2/State.
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE AND
RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATED : 04.09.2026. The State has preferred an application for seeking leave to prefer an appeal against acquittal. 2. Heard learned APP for the State, who submitted that the respondents were prosecuted for the offence punishable under Sections 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on an allegation that 28.03.2012 the injured Sonu Sharad Hadse who was married with the accused No.1 Sharad one year back and cohabiting with her husband at Dongargaon. On the day of incident, her mother- in-law /accused No.2 came and stated that she has to perform the second marriage of her son. On that count, the injured was assaulted and she was set on fire by pouring kerosene on her, due to which she has sustained 50% to 60% burn injuries. On the basis of the said report police have registered crime against the accused persons. He submitted that in support of the prosecution, prosecution has examined
as many as seven witnesses. Prosecution placed reliance on the evidence of the injured as well as medical evidence which shows that injured has sustained 50% to 60% burns. The evidence of victim is corroborated by the medical evidence as well as evidence of police patil, who admitted her in the hospital. However, learned trial Court has ignored the said evidence and acquitted the accused without proper appreciation of the evidence and therefore, the appellant/State has every chance of success in the present appeal. In view of that leave be granted. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents strongly opposed the said contention and submitted that except the evidence of injured there is no corroboration. Learned Trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and acquitted the accused. Thus, learned trial Court endorses the innocence of the present respondents and therefore, no case is made out for grant of leave. 4. On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, we have also considered the evidence of injured who has categorically stated about the assault on her. The same is also corroborated by the evidence of the medical officer PW-2 Dr. Suresh Ahale who has categorically stated that when she was brought to the hospital she was having burn injuries approximately 35%. She was accompanied by her mother-in-law. The evidence of PW-4 Dr. Suresh Waghmare also substantiated the said contention.
The evidence of PW-5 who is the police patil who has admitted her in the hospital as she was found in the cattle shed in the field of Malghane in the injured condition. Thus, at this stage, there is sufficient material on record to show the involvement of the accused
persons. Learned Trial Court appreciated the evidence and came to the conclusion that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the charges. However, considering the aforesaid evidence, it is necessary to re-appreciate the evidence and therefore, the leave requires to be granted. 5. In view of that we proceed to pass following
order:- (i) Leave is granted to the State to prefer an appeal. Appeal be registered. (ii) On registration of the appeal, Mr. A Khadse,
learned counsel waives service of notice for the respondents. (iii) ADMIT. (iv) Call R. and P. (v) Appeal be listed before this Court after receipt of R. and P. (vi) Trial Court, in the meantime, shall ensure the compliance of Section 431 of BNSS (390 of the Cr.P.C.).
[RAJ D. WAKODE, J] [URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.] manisha
Signed by: Mrs. Manisha Shewale Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 05/09/2026 14:49:30