2017 (6) TMI 1372

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....NT V.K. Tahilramani, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-original complainant against the Judgment & Order dated 3.9.2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Sessions Case No. 267 of 2007. By the said Judgment & Order, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents - original accused Nos. 1 to 5 of the offences under Sections 396 and 397 of IPC. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n case that respondent Nos. 1 to 5 were the persons who had assaulted the husband of PW 1 Chandraprabha and committed dacoity. 2. PW 1 Chandraprabha is the only eye witness in the present case. She has only identified respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in test identification parade. Thus, as far as respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, there is no material to connect these respondents with the incident. A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Court cannot be relied upon. There is no other cogent and clinching evidence on record to connect any of the respondents to the crime. Looking to the evidence on record, we find that conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasonable and possible view. The plenitude of power available to the Court hearing an appeal against acquittal is the same as that available to a court hear....