SHASHIKANT TULSIDAS KAMBLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Arfan Sait, appointed under the Free Legal Aid Scheme for both the appellants/orig. accused persons. Also heard learned APP for the State Mrs. Deshmukh. Perused the R & P and also perused the substantive evidence of total 40 prosecution witnesses examined before the trial Court.

(2.) Present Criminal Appeal is preferred through jail by the appellants / orig. accused Nos.1 & 2 challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 30th October, 2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaysingpur, District Kolhapur in Sessions Case No.1 of 2006.

(3.) By the impugned judgment and order both the accused were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 364A of IPC and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ each. They were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 384 read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer RI for three years and fine of Rs.1000/ each, and in default to further undergo RI for one month. They were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 387 read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer RI for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ each, and in default to undergo further RI for one month. Both the appellants/accused were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ each. They were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ each, and in default, to undergo further RI for one month. They were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 507 read with Section 34 of IPC and were sentenced to suffer RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ each, and in default to undergo RI for one month. All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction, present appeal is preferred through jail and in which the learned Advocate Mr.Arfan Sait has been appointed under the Legal Aid.