MAYURBHAI MANSUKHLAL DHOTIJOTAWALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Addl. Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, 2nd Fast Track Court, Surat by his common judgment and order dated 26. 4. 2006 in Sessions Case No. 69 of 2005, convicted appellants accused (1) Digvijay @ Digo Chandrakant Modi; (2) Ketan @ Pintoo Madhukarbhai Joglekar; (3) Pankaj @ Pako Babulal Kadva Patel; (4) Mukesh Naginbhai Panchal; (5) Bharat @ Pintu Balubhai Vasava; (6) Ravi @ Ilu Arjun Sirsat and (7) Mayurkumar Mansukhlal Dhothi Jothawala for the offences punishable under Sections 394 read with Section 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The learned Judge also ordered appellant-accused No. 5 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to further suffer simple imprisonment of three months for the offence punishable under Section 397 read with Section 120 (B) of Indian Penal Code. However, the learned Judge acquitted all the accused for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and ordered to give set off for the period during which the accused were in jail and that all the sentences to run concurrently. As one of the accused, namely, Mahadev was absconding, the learned Judge has not imposed any punishment and therefore, no order was passed with regard to the muddamal articles.

(2.) THE present appeals are preferred against the aforesaid common judgment and order which have been numbered accordingly by each of the accused. Hence, all these appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment of mine.

(3.) HEARD learned Advocate Mr. J. D. Suthar for Mr. N. K. Majmudar for the appellant - original accused No. 3-Pankaj @ Pako Babulal Kadva in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1126 of 2006; for original accused No. 4-Mukesh Naginbhai Panchal in Criminal Appeal No. 1127 of 2006; for original accused No. 2-Ketan Pintoo Madhukarbhai Joglekar in Criminal Appeal No. 1299 of 2006; for accused No. 5-Bharat @ Pintoo Babulal Vasava in Criminal Appeal No. 1459 of 2006; for original accused No. 6 " Ravi @ Ilu Arjunbhai Sirsath in Criminal Appeal No. 1460 of 2006; and learned advocate Mr. D. R. Bhatt for original accused No. 1 " Digvijay @ Digo Chandrakant Modi in Criminal Appeal No. 1269 of 2006; and for original accused No. 3 " Pankaj @ Pako Babulal Patel in Criminal Appeal No. 1181 of 2006. I have also heard learned APP Mr. L. R. Pujari for respondent State.