4-REVN-28-2025 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 28 OF 2025 Pushkar Jayant Mhatre ...Applicant VERSUS State Of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Mr.Darshit Jain a/w Mr.Tejas Padwal and Ms.Devanshi B., for the Applicant. Mr.S.R. Agarkar, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.Digvijay S. Kachare, for Respondent No.2 (Appointed Advocate). ____________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. : . The challenge in this Application is to the order dated 16th December 2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 10th Court, Greater Mumbai, whereby the learned Judge has partly allowed the Discharge Application at Exhibit-05 in Session Case No.511 of 2017, filed by the Applicant. The Applicant was discharged from Section 305 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short) only and his prayer to be discharged from Section 323 of the IPC was rejected. 2. It is prosecution’s case that on 7th April 2016, the Applicant and co-accused took away the mobile phones of the deceased and his friends. They slapped him on account of smoking behind a residential apartment NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.09.07 16:31:49 +0530 4-REVN-28-2025 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble with his friends. Due to the said act, the deceased committed suicide. 3. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant that in the FIR, name of the Applicant is not mentioned. It is mentioned that unknown persons slapped the deceased. The Test Identification Parade was not taken. There is no witness statement to show that Applicant slapped the deceased. There is no case at all against the Applicant, but this fact has not been considered by the learned Sessions Judge and requested to allow the Application. 4. It is contention of the learned APP alongwith learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the Applicant and co-accused slapped the deceased and his friend, took away their mobile phones and asked them to collect it from the Police Station. Due to threatening and slapping by the Applicant and the co-accused, the deceased committed suicide. There are specific allegations against the Applicant about slapping the deceased. The learned Sessions Judge has passed well reasoned order, no interference is required in it. There is prima facie case against the Applicant and requested to reject the Application. 5. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned order and documents produced on record. 6. In the FIR, it is specifically mentioned that an unknown person 4-REVN-28-2025 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble slapped the deceased. After arrest of the Applicant, no Test Identification Parade was taken. There is no witness statement to show that the Applicant had slapped the deceased. The Applicant has been discharged from Section 305 of the IPC, as there is no evidence regarding slapping the deceased by the Applicant. He cannot be tried for the said offence. This fact has not been considered by the learned Sessions Judge and I pass following order. ORDER (i) The Petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 16th December 2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 10th Court, Greater Mumbai, below Exhibit-05 in Sessions Case No.511 of 2017 is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The Applicant is discharged from Section 323 of IPC in Sessions Case No.511 of 2017. (iv) All pending Applications are disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)