DILIP BABRUVHAN GIRI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No. 455 of 2010 has been filed by the appellant/original accused No. 1, who stands convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan, by judgment dated 18/05/2010, in Sessions Case No. 75 of 2007. Criminal Appeal No. 761 of 2010 has been filed by the State questioning the acquittal of the respondent No. 1/original accused No. 1 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 406 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and the acquittal of respondent Nos. 2 to 5/original accused Nos. 2 to 5 for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 406 and 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. Since both these appeals arise from the same judgment of the trial court, these appeals are being decided by this judgment. Facts, as are necessary for the decision of these appeals, may be stated thus:-

(2.) On the case being committed to Court of Sessions, trial court, vide Exh. 20 framed charge against the accused for offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34, 498A read with Section 34, 304(B) read with Section 34 and 406 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The accused denied their guilt and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused was of false implication. Prosecution, in support of its case, examined 23 witnesses. The trial court, upon appreciation of the evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant/Original Accused No. 1 as aforestated, while acquitting the other accused. The State being aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused has filed Criminal Appeal No. 761 of 2010 questioning their acquittal, while the appellant/original accused No. 1 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 455 of 2010 questioning his conviction.

(3.) We have heard Mr. Mohite, learned counsel for the appellant and on behalf of the respondents in the State appeal and the learned APP and in order to effectively deal with the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel for the parties, it would be useful to refer to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.