{"id":40108,"date":"2011-01-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-01-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011"},"modified":"2018-08-21T13:25:16","modified_gmt":"2018-08-21T07:55:16","slug":"amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","title":{"rendered":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011<\/div>\n
Bench: S. S. Shinde<\/div>\n
                                                                  crapl402.99\n                                     1\n\n\n\n\n                                                                    \n          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n\n\n\n                                            \n                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD.\n\n\n                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.402 OF 1999.\n\n\n\n\n                                           \n     1. Amruta s\/o Shankarrao Deshmukh,\n     aged 46 years, occu. Agril.,\n     r\/o Pimpalgaon (Mahadeo),\n\n\n\n\n                              \n     Taluka & Dist. Nanded.\n              \n     2. Anil s\/o Amruta Deshmukh,\n     aged 24 years, occu. Agril.,\n     r\/o as above.                                   ...APPELLANTS.\n             \n                   VERSUS\n\n     The State of Maharashtra.                       ...RESPONDENT.\n      \n\n\n                            ...\n     Shri G.D. Kale, Advocate for appellants.\n   \n\n\n\n     Shri V.G. Shelke, A.P.P. for Respondent\/State.\n                            ...\n\n\n\n\n\n                                          CORAM: S.S. SHINDE,J.\n<\/pre>\n
                                                 7th JANUARY, 2011.\n<\/p>\n
     ORAL JUDGMENT:\n<\/p>\n
     1.    This     appeal     has   been      preferred           by      the<\/p>\n
     appellants      challenging         their      conviction             and<\/p>\n
     sentence awarded by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge,<\/p>\n
     Nanded   in    Sessions    Case     No.123      of     1996.          The<\/p>\n
                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                      crapl402.99
\n                                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
     learned trial Judge has convicted the appellants<\/p>\n
     for offence punishable under Section 324 r.w. 34<\/p>\n
     of I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer S.I. for<\/p>\n
     six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000\/-, in<\/p>\n
     default, to suffer S.I. for three months.\n<\/p>\n
     2.    On perusal of the impugned judgment and the<\/p>\n
     record    and
\n                ig     proceedings            made     available,             the<\/p>\n
     prosecution story, in nutshell is as under:\n<\/p>\n
           The original accused no.1 Amruta is father<\/p>\n
     of accused No.2 Anil and accused No.3 Digambar,<\/p>\n
     who is acquitted by the trial Court.                           Lands of<\/p>\n
     complainant Venkatrao Deshmukh and P.W.4 Nivratti<\/p>\n
     are   near      the        land     of    accused         at     village<\/p>\n
     Pimpalgaon      (Mahadeo),         Tq.   And     district        Nanded.\n<\/p>\n
     The accused are from brother-hood of complainant<\/p>\n
     Venkatrao.        On       8.12.1994,       in     the      noon       time<\/p>\n
     accused   Nos.1       to    3     threatened      the     complainant<\/p>\n
     Venkatrao in his field stating that they will not<\/p>\n
     allow him to take the canal water to his field.\n<\/p>\n
     The canal water to the field of complainant and<\/p>\n
     other fields at village Pimpalgaon (Mahadeo) was<\/p>\n
                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                        crapl402.99
\n                                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
     available      during       the    night    time      only.          So    in<\/p>\n
     order    to    plant    sugarcane,          P.W.2       Datta,        P.W.4<\/p>\n
     Nivratti and P.W. 5 Vishwanath went to the field<\/p>\n
     of complainant on 8.12.1994 at about 8 p.m.                                By<\/p>\n
     that time, the canal water had not yet available<\/p>\n
     in the field of complainant.                    So complainant and<\/p>\n
     others     slept       in     the        field     of      complainant<\/p>\n
     Venkatrao at 8.30 p.m.
\n                 ig                          Thereafter, at about 10<\/p>\n
     to 10.30 p.m., P.W.4 Nivratti raised alarm by<\/p>\n
     shouting      and    uttering       the    word      “Melore”.             By<\/p>\n
     hearing the alarm of P.W.4 Nivratti, complainant,<\/p>\n
     P.W.2 Datta and P.W.5 Vishwanath woke up.                               When<\/p>\n
     complainant         asked     as    to     what       happened,           the<\/p>\n
     accused No.2 Anil assaulted complainant Venkatrao<\/p>\n
     by    “Jambiya”      (Knife)        on    his     head      and     caused<\/p>\n
     bleeding injury on the head.                 Accused No.1 Amruta<\/p>\n
     also assaulted complainant Venkatrao on his left<\/p>\n
     hand palm by held of “Katti” and caused bleeding<\/p>\n
     injury.       Accused No.3 Digamber was armed with an<\/p>\n
     axe and he was standing there.                     All the accused<\/p>\n
     after    assaulting         the    complainant         Venkatrao          and<\/p>\n
     P.W.4 Nivratti and causing them injuries, left<\/p>\n
     the   place    of    incident.            P.W.2     Datta      took       the<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                            crapl402.99
\n                                           4<\/span><\/p>\n
     complainant Venkatrao and P.W.4 Nivratti to the<\/p>\n
     Civil      Hospital,         Nanded        by     Auto       rickshaw          for<\/p>\n
     medical treatment.              The Medical Officer on duty<\/p>\n
     informed the P.W.9 Police Head Constable Ganesh<\/p>\n
     Kendre,        who    recorded       the     complainant.                Office<\/p>\n
     punishable under Sections 307 r.w. 34 of I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
     was registered against the accused persons. After<\/p>\n
     carrying out necessary investigation, the Police<\/p>\n
     filed charge-sheet in the Court of J.M.F.C., who<\/p>\n
     in    turn      committed       the        case     to      the     Court       of<\/p>\n
     Sessions,            offence         u\/s        307         I.P.C.         being<\/p>\n
     exclusively triable by Sessions Court.\n<\/p>\n
     4.     Consequent upon committal of the case, the<\/p>\n
     Sessions        Court       framed    charge          for    the      offences<\/p>\n
     punishable under Section 307 r.w. 34                               of I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
     and    section        324    r.w.     34    of     I.PC.       Against         the<\/p>\n
     accused. The learned trial Court, after trial,<\/p>\n
     convicted and sentenced the original accused Nos.\n<\/p>\n
     1    and   2    as    mentioned       above        and      acquitted          the<\/p>\n
     original        accused       No.3    of     the      charges         levelled<\/p>\n
     against him. Hence, this appeal by the appellants<\/p>\n
     – original accused Nos.1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n
                                                     ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span><\/p>\n
                                                                    crapl402.99
\n                                      5<\/span><\/p>\n
     5.    Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and<\/p>\n
     the learned A.P.P. for the respondent \/ State at<\/p>\n
     length.\n<\/p>\n
     6.    The    learned      Counsel       for      the      appellants<\/p>\n
     submitted that the prosecution has not explained<\/p>\n
     the injuries on the person of accused No.2 Anil.\n<\/p>\n
     It   has    come   in    the    evidence          of     P.W.7       that<\/p>\n
     accused Anil has also sustained injuries.                        Though<\/p>\n
     there is evidence of eye witnesses, including two<\/p>\n
     injured witnesses and medical evidence, the said<\/p>\n
     evidence       suffers           from         certain              minor<\/p>\n
     discrepancies.      The        learned      Counsel          for       the<\/p>\n
     appellants     also      submitted        that         the     alleged<\/p>\n
     incident took place            during the night and due to<\/p>\n
     darkness,     it    is    difficult         to      identify           the<\/p>\n
     culprits.     He, therefore, prayed for acquittal of<\/p>\n
     the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
           Learned counsel for the appellants submitted<\/p>\n
     that the prosecution has examined only interested<\/p>\n
     witnesses and no independent witnesses have been<\/p>\n
                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                       crapl402.99
\n                                         6<\/span><\/p>\n
     examined. The Medical Officer does not support<\/p>\n
     the case of the prosecution as his evidence shows<\/p>\n
     that    that    the      injuries       are      caused        by     blunt<\/p>\n
     object.      Learned       counsel       further        submits          that<\/p>\n
     evidence of eye witnesses shows that the injuries<\/p>\n
     are by sharp weapon, however, medical evidence<\/p>\n
     shows    that      the    injuries        are    caused        by     blunt<\/p>\n
     object. Therefore, counsel would submit that the<\/p>\n
     prosecution case that victims were assaulted by<\/p>\n
     Katti and axe is falsified by medical evidence.\n<\/p>\n
     Counsel further submitted that injuries sustained<\/p>\n
     by the victims are simple in nature. Panchas have<\/p>\n
     not supported the case of the prosecution about<\/p>\n
     recovery of the alleged weapon.                     Learned counsel<\/p>\n
     further      invited       my     attention       to     the      medical<\/p>\n
     evidence and also evidence of eye witnesses and<\/p>\n
     submitted       that      the     appellants        deserve         to     be<\/p>\n
     acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
     7.     On    the      other     hand,      the      learned         A.P.P.\n<\/p>\n
     submitted that there are injured eye witnesses to<\/p>\n
     the incident.            The accused and the injured are<\/p>\n
     known   to     each      other.         Before    the     incident         in<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                          crapl402.99
\n                                           7<\/span><\/p>\n
     question, there had been altercations between the<\/p>\n
     complainant party and the accused persons, which<\/p>\n
     has resulted in the incident of assault in the<\/p>\n
     night.              The        prosecution           witnesses             have<\/p>\n
     categorically          named         the     accused        persons          and<\/p>\n
     attributed       the        role      played       by     each       of      the<\/p>\n
     accused.       The medical evidence and the report of<\/p>\n
     the     Chemical
\n                   ig          Analyzer         also    corroborates              the<\/p>\n
     evidence of the prosecution witnesses in material<\/p>\n
     particulars.          The learned trial Court believed<\/p>\n
     the     evidence          of    the        prosecution          witnesses,<\/p>\n
     supported by the medical evidence ad C.A. Report,<\/p>\n
     and convicted the appellants – original accused<\/p>\n
     Nos.1    and    2     for      the    offence       punishable            under<\/p>\n
     Section 324 r.w.34 of I.P.C. and sentenced them<\/p>\n
     as aforesaid.              All the accused were, however,<\/p>\n
     acquitted for the offence punishable u\/s 307 of<\/p>\n
     I.P.C.       The accused No.3 was also acquitted u\/s<\/p>\n
     324     of     I.C.       The      learned        A.P.P.        vehemently<\/p>\n
     supported the judgment and order of conviction<\/p>\n
     and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
     8.    This Court admitted the appeal in the year,<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                   crapl402.99
\n                                     8<\/span><\/p>\n
     1999 and granted bail to the appellants.                              The<\/p>\n
     appellants are on bail at present.\n<\/p>\n
     9.   I     have    given      due    consideration            to      the<\/p>\n
     submissions       of   the     learned       Counsel        for       the<\/p>\n
     appellants and the learned A.P.P. for the State.\n<\/p>\n
     I have carefully perused the evidence of P.W..1<\/p>\n
     Venkatrao, who is an injured witness.\n<\/p>\n
                 ig                                                   He has<\/p>\n
     stated in his evidence before the trial Court in<\/p>\n
     para 3, thus:\n<\/p>\n
          “3.    The    incident     occurred         about       3     years<\/p>\n
          before.      On the day of incident, the accused<\/p>\n
          No.1 to 3 informed me that they will not
\n          allow me to take water of the Canal.                              In
\n          that     night,    I,     my     son    Sopan,        my      elder<\/p>\n
          brother Nivratti and my nephews Datta and
\n          Vishwanath        went     towards       field         for       the
\n          purpose of planting sugarcane, in the field.
\n          As there was no water coming through water<\/p>\n
          channal, in the field, therefore, we went to
\n          see the same in the field.                  At about 10.00
\n          p.m. or 10.30 p.m. accused No.1 Amruta, Anil
\n          and    Digamber       started     assaulting          my      elder
\n          brother Nivratti.              We were all sleeping at
\n          one place in the field nearer to each other.
\n          My     brother        Nivratti         raised       alarm         as<\/p>\n
                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                    crapl402.99
\n                                    9<\/span><\/p>\n
           “Melore”.     The accused persons assaulted to
\n           Nivratti with weapons Jambia, Axe and Katti<\/p>\n
           (used   for    cutting       of     sugarcane).                Then
\n           accused No.2 Anil dealt with Jambia to me on
\n           my head on occipital region.                    Accused No.1<\/p>\n
           Amruta dealt Katti blow on my left hand palm
\n           posterior     side    near    the       wrist.            Due     to
\n           assault to me, my wearing shirt and Dhoti<\/p>\n
           were stained with blood.                 Brother Nivratti
\n           was assaulted on left side arm pit, on left<\/p>\n
           side near the ear and on his head.                         In the
\n           same night, my nephew Datta took us to Govt.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           Hospital, Nanded.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           The   evidence   of    P.W.1        Venkatrao             is     not<\/p>\n
     shattered in the cross-examination.\n<\/p>\n
     10.   P.W.2 Datta in his evidence before the Court<\/p>\n
     has stated thus:\n<\/p>\n
           “After taking meal at home, at about 8.00 or
\n           8.30 p.m., I , my father Nivratti, brother<\/p>\n
           Vishwanath,    uncle     Venkatrao          and      my    cousin
\n           brother Sopan went to the field in night. As
\n           we did not notice water of the canal we went
\n           to sleep at one place nearer to each other.
\n           Then at about 10.00 p.m. or 10.30 p.m., I
\n           heard the alarm raised by my father Nivratti
\n           as “Bapre Melore”.           Hearing the alarm of my<\/p>\n
                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                        crapl402.99
\n                                          10<\/span><\/p>\n
           father, I got woke up. I saw injury to the
\n           left side rib of my father.                       I say accused<\/p>\n
           No.3 Digamber giving axe blow to my father
\n           near left side ear.                   We all had woke up
\n           hearing alarm of my father. I say accused<\/p>\n
           No.2 Anil giving Jambia blow on the head of
\n           my   uncle     Venkatrao.             I     say    accused         No.1
\n           Amruta giving blow with Katti on the left<\/p>\n
           hand of Venkatrao on the palm portion.                               Due
\n           to   assault
\n                 ig           my    father           Nivratti       and     uncle
\n           Venkatrao          sustained              bleeding        injuries.
\n           After the incident, all the accused persons<\/p>\n
           went    away      to    their       field.         Our    field       is
\n           adjoining to road.                   Therefore, I took my
\n           father and uncle in one Auto rickshaw to
\n           Nanded Hospital, and both were admitted in<\/p>\n
           the hospital.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           In   the    cross-examination,               the     evidence         of<\/p>\n
     P.W.2 Datta is not shattered.\n<\/p>\n
     11.   P.W.3       Dr.        Gajendra           Deshpande,          Medical<\/p>\n
     Officer, G.G.M. Hospital, Nanded had examined the<\/p>\n
     injured persons and found two stab injuries on<\/p>\n
     the person of Nivratti Kamaji Deshmukh and two<\/p>\n
     C.L.Ws.      On    the       person        of     Venkatrao          Kamaji<\/p>\n
     Deshmukh.     These injuries have been proved by the<\/p>\n
     Medical      Officer         P.W.3        Dr.     Deshpande.               The<\/p>\n
                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                 crapl402.99
\n                                  11<\/span><\/p>\n
     evidence of these witnesses is also corroborated<\/p>\n
     by the C.A. Report on record.\n<\/p>\n
         P.W.3 Dr. Gajendra Deshpande in para 2 of<\/p>\n
     his examination has stated that on examination of<\/p>\n
     patient   Nivrutti        Kamaji     Deshmukh           he      found<\/p>\n
     following injuries on his person:-\n<\/p>\n
          1.<\/p>\n
               Stab    injury     on    chest     on     left      middle<\/p>\n
               Exalary line of memary region, of size<\/p>\n
               1″ x 1\/2″ x 1\/2″. age of injury within<\/p>\n
               24     hours,     caused      by      sharp        weapon,<\/p>\n
               simple in nature.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          2    Stab injury on left memary region in<\/p>\n
               between mid clavicular region. Size 1″\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               x 1\/2″ x1\/2″, simple in nature, age of<\/p>\n
               injury within 24 hours caused by sharp<\/p>\n
               weapon.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         In    para    3   of     examination            of       patient<\/p>\n
     Venkatrao Kamaji Deshmukh, P.W.3 found following<\/p>\n
     injuries on his person<\/p>\n
                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                               crapl402.99
\n                                 12<\/span><\/p>\n
           1   Contused lacerated wound, six, 1\/2″ x<\/p>\n
               1\/2″ x 1\/2″ on dorsal ospect let hand.\n<\/p>\n
               Age within 24 hours, simple in nature,<\/p>\n
               caused by blunt and hard object.\n<\/p>\n
           2   C.L.W.     1\/2″   x    1\/2″    x    1\/2″       on     left<\/p>\n
               parietal region caused within 24 hours,<\/p>\n
               caused by blunt and hard object, simple<\/p>\n
               in nature.\n<\/p>\n
           In para 4, P.W.3 Dr. has stated that the<\/p>\n
     injures   on   the    person     of     patient          Nivrutti<\/p>\n
     mentioned in certificate Exh.22 can be possible<\/p>\n
     with article 6 Jambia-cum-knife.                 The injuries<\/p>\n
     mentioned on the person of Venkatrao described in<\/p>\n
     certificate Exh.23 can be possible with Article<\/p>\n
     No.5 Katti by its blunt side.\n<\/p>\n
     12.   Taking overall of the matter, I am of the<\/p>\n
     opinion that the learned trial Court has rightly<\/p>\n
     believed the evidence of the injured witnesses<\/p>\n
     and the medical evidence as also the C.A. Report<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                 crapl402.99
\n                                   13<\/span><\/p>\n
     and came to the conclusion that the accused –\n<\/p>\n
     appellants are guilty of the offence punishable<\/p>\n
     under   Section      324    r.w.    34    of     I.P.C.             The<\/p>\n
     conviction      of    the     appellants          requires           no<\/p>\n
     interference.\n<\/p>\n
         The appellants were in jail during trial for<\/p>\n
     the period from 9.12.1994 to 17.12.1994.\n<\/p>\n
             There are mitigating circumstances in this<\/p>\n
     case.     The   prosecution        has   not    explained           the<\/p>\n
     injuries on the person of the accused Anil.                          It<\/p>\n
     also cannot be lost sight of the fact that the<\/p>\n
     sentence has been awarded by the trial Court in<\/p>\n
     the year, 1999 whereas the appeal is being heard<\/p>\n
     in the year, 2011. There is some substance in the<\/p>\n
     contention of the counsel of the appellants that<\/p>\n
     recovery of weapons is not convincingly proved by<\/p>\n
     the prosecution. There is also some substance in<\/p>\n
     the contention of the counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
     that there is no consistency in the evidence of<\/p>\n
     eye witnesses and also in medical evidence, that<\/p>\n
     the injuries caused are also simple in nature.                         I<\/p>\n
                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                    crapl402.99
\n                                   14<\/span><\/p>\n
     am, therefore, of the opinion that the ends of<\/p>\n
     justice    will    meet   if          the   sentence           of      the<\/p>\n
     appellants    is    reduced      to     the      period        already<\/p>\n
     undergone.\n<\/p>\n
     13.   In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.\n<\/p>\n
     The conviction of the appellants under Section<\/p>\n
     324 r.w. 34 of I.P.C., is confirmed. However, the<\/p>\n
     sentence awarded to them is reduced from S.I. for<\/p>\n
     six months, to the period already undergone by<\/p>\n
     the appellants. In so far as the order of the<\/p>\n
     trial     court    to   pay     fine        of      Rs.1000\/-           is<\/p>\n
     concerned, the same is maintained. In view of<\/p>\n
     this, their bail bonds stand cancelled.\n<\/p>\n
                                                 [ S.S. SHINDE, J ]<\/p>\n
                                   …..\n<\/p>\n
     Kadam\/*<\/p>\n
                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:44:56 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 Bench: S. S. Shinde crapl402.99 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.402 OF 1999. 1. Amruta s\/o Shankarrao Deshmukh, aged 46 years, occu. Agril., r\/o Pimpalgaon (Mahadeo), Taluka & Dist. Nanded. 2. Anil s\/o […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAmruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\"},\"wordCount\":2163,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\",\"name\":\"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011","datePublished":"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011"},"wordCount":2163,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011","name":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-01-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-21T07:55:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amruta-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-january-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amruta vs The State Of Maharashtra on 7 January, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40108"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40108\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}