ANIL Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Ad -hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati dated 17.8.2010 in Sessions Trial No. 35/08, thereby convicting the appellants for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 & 342 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - and in default, to suffer further R.I. for six months, and sentencing them under Sec. 342 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer R.I. for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default, to suffer further R.I. for 15 days, the appellants have approached this Court. The prosecution story, in brief, as could be gathered from the material placed on record is as under: - -

(2.) The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, submit that the learned trial Judge has grossly erred in convicting the appellants. It is submitted that the conviction is only on the basis of the dying declaration. It is, however, submitted that the said dying declaration is full of lacunae. It is further submitted that the names in the dying declaration do not tally with the actual names of the accused persons. It is, therefore, submitted that the appeals deserve to be allowed and the accused/appellants deserve to be acquitted.

(3.) As against this, the learned A.P.P. submits that the accused were apprehended near the spot of the occurrence. It is further submitted that the accused persons have sustained burn injuries which are not explained by them. It is, therefore, submitted that the prosecution has proved the circumstances beyond reasonable doubt and as such, the appeals need no interference.