SAYYED AMAAN SAYED IMAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY these appeals, the appellants have questioned the legality and correctness of the judgment dated 16.07.2009 passed by Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.186/2007 thereby convicting the appellants for an offence punishable u/s 302 r/w 34 of the IPC and u/s 307 r/w 34 of the IPC and sentencing imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default to suffer SI for one year and RI for 7 years, and to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- each, in default to suffer SI for 6 months, respectively. As both these appeals arise out of one judgment, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) SUCH of the facts, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may briefly be stated thus -

(3.) IT is in the evidence of PW-3 Mohd Rafiq that deceased Shakur was his father and was engaged in the business of bricks. Appellant Hakim was doing the business of brick supply. He and his father used to purchase bricks from appellant Hakim so also from brick suppliers from different places. Appellant Aman was working as a driver with appellant Hakim. 20 days prior to the incident, they had purchased 2000 bricks from appellant Hakim, however they were faulty and hence, appellant Hakim was asked to refund the amount, however Hakim had threatened of dire consequences. He has further stated that on 06.05.2007, appellant Hakim had quarreled with the deceased for which complaints were also lodged against each other, however the dispute was resolved with the intervention of their relatives. He has also stated that on 11.05.2007, he and his father Shakur (deceased) were proceeding towards Khultabad and at about 9.30 a.m. when they reached at the bus stand of village Kagjipura, they met PW-4 Shaikh Raju and other brick suppliers. Thereafter, they proceeded further on the motor cycle, which was driven by his father, deceased Shakur and he was riding on pillion. After they crossed 3 to 4 km, they saw a tempo bearing registration No.MH-10 A-4430 was coming from opposite direction. He saw appellants Hakim and Aman along with father in law and brother in law of appellant Hakim in the cabin of the said tampo. When they entered Nadirabad village, he saw that the said vehicle took turn and was proceeding to Khultabad in a high speed and gave dash to their motor cycle in front of Anil Chemical Company. Due to the said dash, he and his father felled down and his father had sustained bleeding injuries on head. After sometime, PW-4 Shaikh Raju and others came at the post and shifted them to Primary Health Center, Khultabad from where they were shifted to Ghati Hospital, Aurangabad. His father expired in Ghati Hospital, Aurangabad while under treatment. He had also sustained injuries on his chest and legs. Police recorded his statement / complaint (Exhibit-20) in Ghati Hospital. He has asserted that the incident was not an accident but the vehicle gave dash to their motorcycle with an intention to commit murder of his father and also attempted to commit his murder. He has stated in his cross examination that Shakil Ahmed did not meet him in Ghati Hospital. The day was Friday. He had noticed the tempo for the first time when it was at the distance of 50/60 feet behind them. His father was riding the motor cycle in a moderate speed. He has further stated that his relatives and acquaintances had met him in the Ghati Hospital, before his complaint was recorded. He has further stated that Advocate Biyabani was not present at the time of recording of his complaint. He has further stated that there was no impact of the dash of the tempo on rear side shock observers of the motor bike. He has admitted that he had not given the case history to the Medical officer at Primary Health Center, Khultabad. He has further admitted that in the complaint he had not mentioned the name of the driver of the vehicle, as he was not knowing his name and therefore, he had only given his description. He has further admitted that after the vehicle was crossed, after some time he turned back and saw the same. He had seen the number of the tempo, before it was crossed. He has also admitted that it is true that there was no number plate to the front side of the tempo. In his further cross examination he has admitted that he was acquainted with appellant Hakim since last 5 to 6 years, as he was doing business transactions with him.