BABAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides.

(2.) Present application has been filed for suspension of sentence passed in Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2017 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar on 31-01-2020 thereby confirming the conviction awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.5, Ahmednagar in R.C.C. No.411 of 2010 dated 17-12-2016 thereby holding the present applicants guilty of committing offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing them for simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.3000/- (Rs. Three thousand only) each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months.

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for the applicants has submitted that both the Courts below have not appreciated the evidence properly. Though informant and his family members were corroborating each other, yet, it is an apparent corroboration. Minute consideration of the FIR together with the evidence would show that they are contradictory to each other on material aspects. On the earlier day of incident, there was quarrel between the informant and the accused. Though the informant and the witnesses say that, that dispute was mitigated, yet, what both the Courts have not considered is that the accused was prosecuting his legal remedy as he had approached the police with the FIR. As per the FIR, the alleged incident is stated to have taken place on 04-05-2010 at 12.30 a.m. There was admittedly dark at that time. Further, in the supplementary statement which was recorded on 17-05-2010, the informant has changed the version by saying that there was light in which he had identified the accused persons as well as the weapons. Perusal of the testimony of P.W.-4, who is the wife of the informant, would show that the incident had taken place at 2.30 a.m and she has categorically stated that lights were put off. She says that nobody was there to rescue them when, in fact, there are houses surrounding the house of the informant. Only the interested witnesses have been examined. The medical evidence is also not corroborating the ocular evidence and therefore, there are hopes to the revision applicant in the revision. Under the said circumstance, the conviction awarded to them deserves to be suspended till the revision is heard and disposed of.