SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. The learned A.P.P waives service of notice for respondent/State.

(2.) The applicant was tried for the offences punishable under Ss. 302 , 323 , 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner, District Ahmednagar on appreciating evidence held the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Ss. 304 Part II, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code . The applicant has been sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years for the offences punishable under Ss. 304 Part II i.e. maximum punishment imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Sangamner.

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant has referred to the medical evidence and tried to convince the Court that the injury was not possible due to alleged weapon used in the crime. There was delay in medical examination of the deceased and performing the post mortem. He also referred to the evidence of the eye witnesses and vehemently argued that it was the deceased who instigated the applicant and therefore, the incident happened. There are no circumstances to believe that the offence against the applicant is proved under Ss. 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code. It was a case of single blow. Relying on the case of Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai And Others Vs. State of Gujarat 1999 DJLS (SC) 614, he would argue that the applicant has been sentenced for a fix period. He has already undergone two years of imprisonment, therefore, this Court may liberally suspend the sentence. There are no exceptional circumstances to refuse the suspension. The past of the applicant/accused was unblemished. He is the bread winner of his family. The appeal may takes it's time and there are no chance of hearing of the appeal on merits in the near future. For the above reasons, he claims suspension of sentence.