AJIT LAXMAN KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HE appellants are hereby assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 1106/1999, whereby the learned judge convicted the appellants for offences punishable under section 399 r/ w section 34 of Indian Penal Code and each of them are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 3. 000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months, she sentenced each of the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under section 402 r/w section 34 of Indian Penal Code. She sentenced each of the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12-7-1999 at about 1 a. m. P. I. Worlikar of Crime Branch informed his colleagues, P. S. I. Dias, Madhukar dabhade and Nivruti Yadav that from reliable sources, he received the infomation, that one lady was to go to Worli Milk Dairy at Worli for depositing amount of milk collection and she was to be robbed by some miscreants. After learning this information they decided to separate themselves in two groups, and one group was to be accompany by said lady who was to board in bus route No. 171 from Antop Hill and was to reach Worli Dairy at Worli. They were to travel by the said bus along with said lady. Another group was to lay in ambush near Worli Dairy for catching the said miscreants. The first group went to Antop Hill and boarded the said bus along with the said lady and was to travel from Antop Hill to Worli Milk Dairy. Second group lay in ambush near Worli Milk Dairy precincts. At 4. 55 p. m. the Police Officers mentioned above noticed 5 persons moving in suspicious manner. They kept themselves in the near vicinity of those persons and learnt that those persons were to commit dacoity by robbing money from the said lady as well as to commit a dacoity in Dena Bank branch. As soon as the said lady and police staff members alighted from the said bus, after seeing movements of the appellants, the appellants were caught by the members of raiding party. In presence of panch witnesses, their persons were searched. A chopper was found in possession of appellant, Manish Tambe. A Kukri was found in possession of appellant, rajapurkar, a knife was found in possession of appellant, Koli. One Rajendra kalu Nohar was able to escape. One chopper was found in possession of appellant, Ajit Laxman Kamble. Those weapons were seized in view of seizure panchnama, which was drawn at the spot. The said lady and appellants were taken to Police Station. A crime was registered against the appellants and after necessary investigation they were put to trial. Rajendra Nohar was acquitted by the trial Court and the present four appellants were convicted and ' sentenced as mentioned above. That order of conviction and sentence has been put to challenge by this appeal.

(3.) SHRI Pendse, Counsel appearing for the appellant, criticised the said judgment and order by raising various points. The important points mentioned are as under:-i. The said information was nowhere recorded. ii. There is discrepancy in the evidence of the police personnels in respect of the presence of informant in the raiding party. iii. The panch witnesses did not support the prosecution evidence completely. iv. The prosecution evidence is unnatural. He submitted that in view of the glaring infirmities in the prosecution evidence, the learned trial Judge committed the error in passing order of conviction and sentence against the appellants and therefore, as the said order is incorrect, improper and illegal it be set aside and appellants be acquitted.