AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vishnu Sahai, J.—Heard Ms Mhatre holding for Mr. R.L. Patil for the petitioner, Mr. Gavenekar for Respondent Nos. 1 to 11 and Mr. Singbal, APP for Respondent No. 12.
By this revision application, the petitioner (Original complainant) has impugned the Judgment and order dated 15.6.1990 passed by the Additional sessions Judge, Raigad at Alibag in Criminal Revision Application No. 16 of 1987, whereby the revision preferred by the respondent No. 12 for enhancement of sentence of the respondent Nos. 1 to 11 was dismissed. It appears that the respondent Nos. 1 to 11 were prosecuted for offences punishable u/s 147, 148, 336, 427, 504 and 506 IPC read with 149 IPC, in the Court of the JMFMC, Alibag on a complaint filed by the petitioner. Excepting respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 7 who were directed to furnish a bond of good behaviour for a period of two years, other respondents were each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 75/- each in default to suffer 15 days Simple imprisonment by the JMFC, Alibag.
Both the respondents Nos. 1 to 11 and respondent No. 12 challenged the order of the JMFC, the former by preferring Criminal Revision Application No. 108 of 1986 in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Raigad at Alibag, and the latter by preferring Criminal Revision Application No. 16 of 1987 in the said Court. Since respondent Nos. 1 to 11 did not press Criminal Revision Application No. 108 of 1986, respondent No. 12 also did not press Criminal Revision Application No. 16 of 1987.
I have heard Ms. Madhuri Mhatre holding for Mr. R.L. Patil for the petitioner, Mr. C.G. Gavenekar for respondent Nos. 1 to 11 and Mr. P.R. Singbal, APP for respondent No. 12. In my view, considering the circumstances that the incident is of a trivial nature and took place nearly 14 years ago, the larger consideration of justice do not require interference with the impugned order.
In the result, this Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. Rule stands discharged.