Research › Browse › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

1970 DIGILAW 61 (BOM)

ADOLFO PATROCINIO ESTEVAM GOMES v. BHANU NEUGUI

1970-04-10

C.M.RAO

body1970
ORDER This is a petition filed under Article 134(1)(c) of the Indian Constitution praying to grant certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of this Court dated 22nd December, 1969 in criminal application No. 24 of 1969 on the file of this Court. 2. The petitioner had filed a complaint against the respondents herein and it was dismissed by the Magistrate holding that the respondents herein had acted in good faith and they had no dishonest or criminal intention. The respondents herein were acquitted by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner filed application in this Court under Section 417, Cr.P.C., praying to permit him to prefer appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate. That application was rejected by this Court by order dated 22-12-1969. The petitioner now prays that certificate be granted to him stating that he can prefer appeal against the order of this Court. 3. Arguments of the learned advocates appearing for the petitioner have been heard. This petition can be granted if this Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law or principle. (Vide the decision of the Supreme Court in Babu v. State of U.P. AIR 1965 SC 1467 ). This Court after hearing the arguments of the advocate for the petitioner and perusing the judgment of the lower Court had come to the conclusion that the judgment of the lower Court was not perverse and that it could not be said that the opinion which the lower Court formed could not be formed at all and had rejected the petitioner's application filed under Section 417, Cr.P.C. The petitioner's learned advocate now relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in 'Pyare Lal Bhargava v. The State of Rajasthan,' AIR 1963 SC 1094 , argues that in view of the facts of the case it could not be held that the respondents herein had acted in good faith and they had no dishonest or criminal intention and that this petition is fit to be allowed. 4. After fully considering the material which is now before this Court in the light of the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner I am not convinced that there are any exceptional or special circumstances on the basis of which this petition can be allowed. 4. After fully considering the material which is now before this Court in the light of the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner I am not convinced that there are any exceptional or special circumstances on the basis of which this petition can be allowed. A certificate under Article 134(1)(c) can be granted only if substantial question of law or principle is involved in a case. I find no proper reason to allow this petition. The petition is rejected. Petition rejected.