(1.) THE appellants here are the original accused Nos. 1 to 5 who were, alongwith seven others tried for commission under sections 147, 148, 307 read with section 149 of I. P. C. as also under section 37 (i), (iii) read with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. While accused Nos. 6 to 12 were all acquitted of the above stated charges as also the charge under 201 of the I. P. C. For the offence under section 307 read with section 149 of I. P. C. , each of these appellants/accused Nos. 1 to 5 was sentenced to suffer R. I. For four years and a fine of Rs. 250/- i/d of each to undergo further R. I. for 6 months. For the offence under section 148 of the I. P. C. , each of htem ws sentenced to R. I. for 6 months and no separate sentence was awarded for the offence under section 147 of the I. P. C. The substantive sentence were directed to run concurrently.
(2.) THE five appellants and seven others who were acquitted all came to be prosecuted of the following as case put forth by the prosecution: he accused No. 1 Rajabhau Rasal had an elder brother by name Sudhir. In the year 1980 Sudhir was murdered by Manohar Vir who is the victim of the attempt to commit murder in this case. Manohar Vir was tried by the Session Court at Solapur, for the offence under section 302 of the I. P. C. , who apparently came to be convicted under section 304 (ii) of the I. P. C. He was sentenced to R. I. for 5 years. However, with the statutory remission granted to him, the period of imprisonment was over in about 3? years and he was let out on 1-7-1983.
(3.) THE fact that Manohar Vir was lay off lightly for the murder of his brother, was not taken lightly by the accused No. 1 Rajabhau Rasal. The desire to wreck vengence upon him and punish him life for life, to crowd in the mind of the accused No. 1, when Manohar Vir was thus lay off lightly as considered by him. With revenge overwhelming him, he was on the look out to punish Manohar Vir appropriately i. e. by doing his murder also.