MANOJ MAHADEV GAWADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants/original accused Nos. 1 to 4 along with two other accused persons viz. original accused Nos. 5 and 6 i.e. Mangal Mahadev Gavade and Suresh Dattu Gavade were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 146, 147, 148, 149, 452, 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code by the District Judge -3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli in Sessions Case No. 215 of 2006. The Appellants/original accused Nos. 1 to 4 are convicted by the District Judge -3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli by its impugned judgment and order dated 11th April 2011 in Sessions Case No. 215 of 2006 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - each, in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. The Appellants i.e. original accused Nos. 1 to 4 have been further convicted under Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - each, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The Trial Court has acquitted the Appellants i.e. original accused Nos. 1 to 4 from the offences punishable under Sections 143, 146, 147, 148, 149 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court has acquitted the original accused Nos. 5 and 6 i.e. Mangal Mahadev Gavade and Suresh Dattu Gavade respectively from all the offences charged against them i.e. from the offences under Sections 143, 146, 147, 148, 149, 452, 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants have preferred the aforesaid Appeals thereby impugning the judgment and order dated 11th April 2011 passed by the District Judge -3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli in Sessions Case No. 215 of 2006. In the present Judgment, the Appellants are termed with reference to their original accused numbers for preciseness in the matter.

(2.) THE facts which are enumerated from the record can briefly be stated as under :

(3.) HEARD Dr. Yug Mohit Chaudhary, Mr. Kuldip S. Patil, learned advocates for the Appellants and Smt. V.R. Bhonsale, learned APP for the State. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the motive behind the entire crime. They submitted that the prosecution has further failed to establish the link and/or any connection between the actual administration of the powder of Dhattura seeds i.e. (Argemone Mexicana), which according to the prosecution was administered to the deceased persons through tea as a sedative. They further submitted that there is no evidence of last seen together or any other evidence which is legally admissible which would link the Appellants with the present crime. In other words, the evidence adduced by the prosecution cannot be termed as legally admissible evidence as against the Appellants. They therefore urged before this Court that in the absence of any legally admissible evidence the Appellants may be acquitted from the charges framed against them. The learned APP Smt. Bhonsale while supporting the impugned judgment and order vehemently opposed the submissions of the Appellants and prayed to this Court that the conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court by the impugned judgment may be upheld.