SHALIGRAM Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant original accused No. 1 has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 16.6.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 108 of 2009. By the said judgment and order the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant under section 302, 397 and 449 of IPC. For the offence under section 302 the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default RI for six months. For the offence under section 397 of IPC the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default RI for six months and for the offence under section 449 of IPC the appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default RI for six months. The prosecution case briefly stated is as under:

(2.) Charge came to be framed against appellant original accused No. 1 and another accused i.e. original accused No. 2 under section 449, 397 and 302 of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. The defence of the appellant is that of total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted original accused No. 2 of all charges. However, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated in para 1 above, hence this appeal.

(3.) We have heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant and the learned APP for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that the prosecution has proved the charges against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.