Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1992 DIGILAW 768 (SC)

Ramdas Narayan Patil v. State of Maharashtra

1992-09-23

G.N.RAY, K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY

body1992
ORDER : K. Jayachandra Reddy, J. The sole appellant along with 40 others was tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323/149, 325/149 and 395 Indian Penal Code. 2. The trial court convicted ten of them and acquitted the rest. The ten convicted accused preferred an appeal and the High Court acquitted nine of them and convicted the appellant herein alone for causing simple hurt and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 200 or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. 3. The prosecution case is as follows: 4. During the Lok Sabha Election in 1977 Dr D.B. Patil was contesting election on the ticket of Janata Party against the Congress candidate Mr S.S. Sawant. The results of the election were announced on March 20, 1977 and Dr Patil was declared as elected. His followers took out a procession to celebrate the victory. A procession consisting of 200-300 persons came near the poultry of the complainant at about 12/12.15 p.m. in a rejoicing mood raising various slogans. It is alleged that the persons in the procession were armed with stones and sticks and that they started pelting stones towards the complainant and his companions and also towards his poultry. Some of them sustained injuries. According to the prosecution the accused were in the procession. 5. During the cross-examination PW 4 deposed that he received stone injury because of the stone hurled by the appellant. The prosecution examined several witnesses and as already mentioned the entire prosecution case has been rejected by both the courts below. The appellant has been convicted on the sole ground that PW 4 has deposed that the stone hurled by the appellant caused injuries on his leg. The defence case is that while running he must have received the injuries. Admittedly a procession was taken out and nearly 200-300 persons were in the procession. In such a situation the identification of the appellant by PW 4 as one who hurled the stone cannot be accepted. It is not safe to convict the appellant on that count. 6. The appeal is allowed. Appeal allowed.