SURESH JAYKUMAR SAMUEL GODAVARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS are the original accused Nos. 1 and 2. They are challenging the judgment and order passed by the 2nd ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, kolhapur in Sessions case No. 102 of 2000. By the said judgment and order dated 4-4-2002, the trial Court convicted the appellant-original accused Nos. 1 and 2 for having committed an offence-punishable under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R. I. for 7 years and to pay fine pf Rs. 5000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further R. I. for six months.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that dacoity took place in the house of the Dr. Dhananjay Gunde on 11-1-2000 between 1. 30 a. m. to 5. 00 a. m. The names of the accused were not known and the FIR was lodged on the same day under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian penal Code and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. The accused were arrested on 27-7-2000. Prior to that, on 25-7-2000, an ambassador car in which the accused were travelling from Hyderabad to omerga was detained and on 27-7-2000 they "were arrested by the Latur and kolhapur police. Between 2-8-2000 and 4-8-2000, recoveries were made at the instance ,of the accused from Chirala and guntun District, Andhra Pradesh. On 26-9-2000 the jewellery recovered from the accused was identified by the prosecution witnesses. On 9-11-2000, identification parade was held in which the three eye-witnesses i. e. Dr. Gunde PW-8, Mrs. Lalita Gunde and their daughter Sucheta Lad - PW-12 identified the accused.

(3.) PROSECUTION case is that on 11-1-2000 the appellants along with the absconding accused committed dacoity in the house of dr. Dhananjay Gunde - PW-8 between 1. 30 a. m. to 5. 00 a. m. They were armed with lethal weapons and took away golden ornaments and other valuable articles and also stole the Maruti Car of the son-in-law of the complainant Dr. Gunde. According to the complainant, accused had entered the house by removing grills and opening the front door. PW-13 - Usha Jaiprakash was sleeping in the bed room on the ground floor along with her husband and, according to her, one accused held her arm and gave a blow on her head, as a result of which she fell down. Prosecution case is that, thereafter, three persons went upstairs to Dr. Gunde's room and one of them sat on his chest and threatened him with a knife. Another person pressed mouth of his wife with his hands. At that time, complainant's married daughter sucheta - PW 12 entered the room, after i she heard the commotion and the third persons pushed her inside the room. The accused, thereafter, demanded keys of the cupboard which were handed over by the wife of the complainant. The accused opened the cupboard, took out jewellery and money and ran away by taking Maruti Car belonging to dr. Gunde's son-in-law. Thereafter, Dr. Gunde and his famiily came put and raised hue and cry. Mis son-in-law who lived next door came there arid, thereafter, called shahpur Police Station. Police arrived soon thereafter and the panchanama of the scene of the offence was made and the statements of witnesses were recorded and FIR was lodged. The Maruti Car which was stolen from the compound of the compalinant was found in front of the bungalow of One baburao Mallappa Kannure - PW-16 at belgaum. Police seized the car under panchanama on 17-1-2000 which was claimed by son-in-law of the complainant dr. Salim Lad-PW-9. An additional statement was given by the complainant to the police on 18-1-2000 giving details of the other articles which were stolen on 11-1-2000. On 29-7-2000. API Mehboob Abdul karim Mujawar - PW-14 was attached to lcb Latur, received an information that some criminals were coming in ambassador car from Andhra Pradesh by National Highway no. 9. The rural police from Solapur also received the information that the said criminals were accused in Crime No. 3 of 2000 which was registered at Kolhapur. Accordingly PW-14 and some other police officers intercepted and arrested the accused and the arrest panchanama was prepared and, thereafter, the custody of the accused was handed over to the rural police constable and they were sent to Kolhapur. The recovery was made at the instance of the accused of gold chain and other jewellery which Was identified by the witnesses on 6-11-2000. The test identification was held and the accused were identified by the three witnesses. The trial Court convicted the accused on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Appellants have preferred this appeal challenging the said judgment and Order.