RAJU PANDURANG MAHALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant calls in question legality of the conviction recorded in terms of Sections 342 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "the IPC) by the Trial Court, and affirmed in appeal by the impugned judgment by learned single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. Two appeals were disposed of by a common judgment. Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 98 was filed by the present appellant along with one Pankaj, while the connected Criminal Appeal No. 50/98 was filed by Raju alias Rajesh S. Kopekar.

(2.) Four accused persons faced trial. The appellants before the High Court were present appellant Raju Pandurang Mahale (A-1), Gautam (A-2), Pankaj (A-3) and Rajesh S. Kopekar (A-4). A-1 to A-4 were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 376 (2)(g), IPC and each of A-1, A-3 and A-4 was sentenced to suffer RI for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation; but Gautam (A-2) was awarded 2 years RI. Additionally, A-1, A-2 and A-4 were found guilty for offences punishable under Sections 342 read with Section 34, IPC. Gautam (A-2) did not prefer any appeal questioning his conviction. A-3 alone was convicted for offence punishable under Section 292, IPC, while A-4 was convicted for offence punishable under Section 323, IPC. A-1, A-3 and A-4 were convicted for offences punishable under Sections 354 read with Section 34, IPC. For offences relatable to Section 342 read with Section 34, IPC, six months RI and for the offence punishable under Section 354, IPC one year custodial sentence was imposed.

(3.) The High Court by the impugned judgment set aside the conviction and sentences of A-1 and A-3 for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(g). So far as the appeal filed by A-4 is concerned, he was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376, IPC, though his conviction in terms of Section 376 (2)(g) was set aside. The conviction of A-1 and A-2 and A-4 for the offences punishable under Sections 342 read with Section 34, IPC and the conviction of A-1, A-3 and A-4 for the offences punishable under Section 354 read with Section 34, IPC was also maintained with the sentence imposed. Conviction of A-4 in terms of Section 323 IPC was maintained. In essence so far as the appellant is concerned, his conviction for the offence punishable under Section 342 read with Section 34, IPC and Section 354 read with Section 34, IPC; was maintained as noted above.