VASHIST PUNDLIK JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants in this appeal stood trial before Addl. Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Sessions Case No. 130 of 1999 for offence under Sections 399 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section3 read with Section25 of Indian Arms Act. , on the allegations that on28. 03. 1993 the appellants assembled in the thick forest near village Yedsi armed with deadly weapons with the intention to commit dacoity and fired shots from the gun towards police personnel with intention to commit murder. At the trial when appellants pleaded not guilty to the charge, the prosecution examined in all seven witnesses including Dr. Ravindra Somnathpurkar (P. W.1) who was Medical Officer, Rural Hospital, having examined appellant No. 1 for bullet injuries sustained by him in counter attack as detailed in the certificate (Exh. 14), Aziz Mahmad Hussain Andurkar (P.W.2), who was attached to Anti dacoity Squad at Osmanabad as P. S. I. to whom on28. 03. 1999 one person named Shalivahan Pralhad Naikwadi (P.W.5) who was driver on the Jeep that was hired by the appellants on27. 03. 1999 and on the basis of information given by him, P. S. I. Andurkar (P.W.2) proceeded to apprehend the appellants and ultimately succeeded to apprehend the appellants and lodged complaint (Exh. 18) on the basis of which offence came to be registered against the appellants vide Crime No. 33/1999, Police Head Constable Jeevan Pawar (P.W.3) who had accompanied P. S. I. Andurkar (P.W.2), Police Head Constable Pandu Lokhande (P.W.4), Bapu Sangale (P.W.6) who was then P. S. I. attached to Rural Police Station Osmanabad who conducted investigation in the said crime and Dhanraj (P.W.7) who acted as panch at the time of recovery of weapons and also when appellants were apprehended. THE learned Judge accepting the evidence found appellants guilty of offence under Section399 of Indian Penal Code and appellant No. 1 was also found guilty of offence under Section307 of the Indian Penal Code. THE learned Judge by his Judgment and Order dated17. 06. 2000 convicted appellants of offence under Section399 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment with one year and also convicted and sentenced appellant no.1 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year while acquitting appellant Nos. 2 to 4 of the offences under Section307 of the Indian Penal Code and acquitted appellants no.1 to 4 of the offence under Section under Section3 read with Section25 of Indian Arms Act. THE learned Judge also ordered that substantive sentences were to run concurrently. This order of conviction and sentence passed in the Judgment is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief, is that witness Naikwadi (P.W.5) approached P. S. I. Andurkar (P.W.2) in S. P. Office, Osmanabad and informed that on27. 03. 1999 two persons Vashist Jadhav (appellant No. 1) and Anant Sonwane (appellant No. 4) hired his Jeep and accompanied by two other persons came to Indapur by his Jeep and then he was asked to take the Jeep to village Wadapuri, Taluka Indapur and after the Jeep was stopped outside the village, appellant No. 1 waited near the Jeep while remaining four persons went in the village and after some time, these four persons returned towards the Jeep with Gun and a belt containing cartridges and he noticed that some villagers were chasing behind those persons and when those persons immediately entered the Jeep asked him to take the Jeep to Barshi and from there to village Yedshi. He informed that as the diesel in the Jeep had exhausted, one of the persons gave Rs. 50/- to him and he proceeded to the Petrol Pump to get the diesel and when he returned taking diesel, he found that nobody was in the Jeep.

(3.) AT about11. 00 to 11. 50 p. m. the Police officers noticed the focus of motorcycle light coming from Yedshi direction towards the temple. The motorcycle was stopped near the Neem tree. Two persons who were on the motorcycle had a 12 bore gun with pillion rider and also the belt containing cartridges and those persons got down from the Motorcycle and the pillion rider handed over the gun and the cartridges to the person who was driving motorcycle. That time, P. S. I. Andurkar (P.W.2) loudly shouted that Police had surrounded them from all sides and that they should not try to run away but to surrender to Police. It is alleged by the prosecution that the said two persons opened fire and shot one bullet from the gun towards P. S. I. Andurkar (P.W.2) and then turned the gun towards western direction with an intention to open fire. The Police men on western side also raised shouts and then P. S. I. Andurkar opened fire from his pistol and shot two bullets towards those two persons, but none was hit. He then fired third shot which hit on the leg of the person who collapsed with the gun and the police officers immediately caught both of them and the gun and the cartridges which was in the belt came to be seized under panchanama (Exh. 17 ). Out of these two persons who were apprehended, the person who sustained bullet injuries on his leg was appellant No. 1 Vashist and the other who was with him was appellant No. 4 Anant Sonawane. All the accused persons along with property seized, were forwarded to Police Station, where P. S. I. Andurkar (P. W. 2) lodged complaint on the basis of which offence was registered vide crime No. 33/1999 on29. 03. 1999 at2. 30 a. m. Appellant No. 1 who was injured was referred to Medical Officer, Rural Hospital for treatment and who was examined by Dr. Ravindra Somnathpurkar (P. W.1), who found two injuries suffered by him, as detailed in the certificate (Exh. 14), which was issued by him. The gun (article No. 4) seized from appellant No. 1 under panchanama (Exh. 17), Pistol (article No. 10) and live cartridges of Pistol (article No. 11) produced by P. S. I. Andurkar seized under panchanama (Exh. 27), from the empty cartridges found in the barrel of rifle (article No. 5) were sent to ballistic experts, Bombay. After completing investigation charge-sheet was filed against the appellants who committed the case to the Court of Sessions.