SANTOSH PRAKASH GURAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals are decided by this common judgment because all these appeals are challenging the same judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khed in Sessions Case No.15/2014. The judgment and order was passed on 15/9/2015. Wherever necessary, the appellants are referred by their names or by their original status as accused. In all, six accused faced the trial. Criminal Appeal No.212/2016 is preferred by the original accused No.1 Imran Shaih, Criminal Appeal No.1089/2015 is preferred by the original accused No.2 Santosh Gurav and Criminal Appeal No.836/2016 is preferred by the original accused No.6 Kiran More. Along with these three appellants, three more accused were also tried but they were acquitted. They were accused No.3 Mahesh Yadav, accused No.4 Rohit Jadhav and accused No.5 Mahadev Magar.

(2.) At the conclusion of the trial, these three appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 392 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to RI for seven years each and to pay fine of Rs.3000.00 each, and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for three months each. They were further convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 451 read with 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer RI for two years each and to pay fine of Rs.2,000.00 each and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for three months each. These sentences were directed to run concurrently. They were given set-off under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C. All the accused, including the present appellants, were acquitted from the charge of commission of offence punishable under Sec. 395 of the IPC.

(3.) Advocate Ms. Ashwini Gaikwad represents the appellant Imran Shaikh. For the other two appellants Shri Veerdhawal Deshmukh is appointed as a Legal Aid Counsel. I have heard both the learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs. Veera Shinde, learned APP for the State of Maharashtra.