JAMIL AHMED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT. Pratibha Patil for the appellant and Shri Shringarpure, A. P. P. for the prosecution. Both of them have been heard at length with reference to the evidence on record.

(2.) THE appellant is hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 1197 of 1992 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Ss. 224, 332 and 307 of Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo following term of sentences. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under S. 224 of Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under S. 307 of I. P. C. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 700/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. The substantive sentences are directed to run concurrently.

(3.) SHRI Shringarpure appearing for the prosecution justified the order of conviction and sentence by pointing out the evidence and submitting that it was above board. He submitted that the evidence of P. W. Saindane has been corroborated by the evidence of P. S. I. , Londhe, Mustakin Allabux Qureshi, medical evidence and seizure of blood stained clothes from the person of the appellant. He submitted that the order of conviction and sentence is correct, proper and legal and the appeal deserves to be dismissed and it be dismissed.