JAWED KHAN @ TINGRYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed by the appellant Jawed Khan @ Tingrya who was tried and convicted for offences under Sections 302, 376, 456, 457, 458, 392 read with Sec. 397 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC"). Along with the appellant (who was arrayed as accused No.-1), two more persons were also put on trial. The charge against the said two persons was that they had received stolen property. The said two accused persons, namely, Pradip Chandaliya (A-2) and Ram Bodkhe (A-3) were also convicted by the trial court and imposed certain monetary fine, which has attained finality as there is no further challenge by A-2 and A-3. Insofar as the appellant is concerned, after convicting him of the aforesaid offences, the trial court imposed the sentence of life imprisonment insofar as conviction under Sec. 302 Penal Code is concerned. Different punishments have been given in respect of other offences and all sentences were to run concurrently. Therefore, the maximum punishment which is awarded is the life imprisonment in respect of the conviction under Sec. 302 IPC.

(2.) The appellant challenged the aforesaid conviction by filing appeal in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. The State also felt aggrieved by the life imprisonment given to the appellant and, therefore, preferred an appeal for enhancing the sentence. By the impugned judgment dated 08.03.2016, the High Court has dismissed the appeal of the appellant thereby maintaining the conviction. At the same time, the appeal preferred by the State has been accepted and allowed. The imprisonment of life is substituted with death penalty.

(3.) In these appeals preferred by the appellant, there is a challenge to the conviction as well as imposition of death penalty. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length insofar as the conviction of the appellant is concerned. It may be recorded that it is a case of circumstantial evidence as there were no eye-witness to the crime allegedly committed by the appellant.