SANJAY MURLIDHAR CHAUGULE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present Cri.Revn.Appln., the applicant is questioning the correctness of the Judgment and Order dated 29th May, 1997 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule in Reg.Trial Case No.305 Of 1993 whereby the applicant alongwith co-accused Sanjay @ Babu Ramdas Ahirrao were convicted for the offences punishable under Section.s. 380, 457 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. For both these offences, the learned Magistrate was pleased to sentenced them to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six months. The sentences were directed to run G.A.Ghule [P.A.] concurrently. No fine was imposed upon them. It is to be mentioned here that other accused Sushilabai w/o Ramadas Ahirrao was acquitted by the learned Magistrate, together with the Judgment and order of dismissal dated 5th July, 2001 passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Dhule in Cri.Appeal No.17-A/1997.

(2.) I have heard Mr. R.M. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant and Mrs. Pratibha Bharad, A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. With their able assistance, I have gone through the Record & Proceedings, which was called by this court at the time of admission of present Cri.Revn.Appln. and also impugned Judgments passed by the courts below.

(3.) During the course of submissions before this court, the learned counsel for the applicant fairly submitted that, in fact, he is not questioning the correctness of the Judgment and Order dated 29th May, 1997 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule in Reg.Trial Case No.305/93, which was confirmed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Cri.Appeal No. 17-A/1997 in respect of holding the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section.s. 380, 457 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code but, he submitted that sentence awarded to the present applicant is at higher side and, therefore, this court be pleased to reduce the quantum of sentence.