AYUSH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (i) Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 04th April, 2013 passed by District Judge -1 and Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial No. 27 of 2012, by which the appellant ­ Ayush son of Nirmal Pugaliya was convicted of the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code, and was sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for Life for the offence punishable under Section 364 and the same sentence for offence punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - for offence punishable under Section 201, Indian Penal Code, and in default of total fine, further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months, the present appeal has been filed by him in this Court.

(2.) Hearing of these appeals commenced with effect from 25th February, 2015. Learned Adv. Mr. A.M. Rizwy with Advs. Mr. H.G. Katekar and Mr. A.A. Sonak commenced their arguments first in Criminal Appeal No. 348 of 2013 against conviction of Ayush. The evidence was read, documents were referred. During the process of reading of evidence of PW 4 Shubham and PW 5 Ridam, this Court came across somewhat strange procedure adopted in recording the evidence of these two witnesses. This Court found that learned Trial Judge did not allow the defence counsel to put omissions, intended to contradict them and instead made an order granting liberty to the defence Advocate, to put questions on omissions directly to the Investigating Officer. That was found obviously in contravention of Section 145 of the Evidence Act. We quote Section 145 of the Evidence Act as under: -

(3.) Accused Ayush was charged for commission of offences under Sections 363, 364 -A, 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the trial, who are his real brothers, were also charged for offence under Section 201 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. But Accused No.2 Navin was convicted of the said offence and he underwent the sentence, while Accused No.3 Nitin was acquitted of the said offence. Resultant, it is only Accused Ayush whose appeal is required to be decided along with the appeals filed by the State.