MOHD KASIF IRSHAD ALI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Appeals can be conveniently disposed of by this common Judgment and order as the appellants in both these appeals were the accused in one and the same case and were tried and convicted on a single trial held by the Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay. The appellant Mohd. Kasif Irshad Ali (in Criminal Appeal No.1084/13) was the accused no.1, and the appellant Rinku Rohatash Khan (in Criminal Appeal No.220/15) was the accused no.2 in the said case. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants of offences punishable under section 452 IPC r/w Sec.34 of the IPC and section 395 IPC. She also convicted the appellant Mohd. Kasif additionally and separately of an offence punishable under section 397 of the IPC. The learned Sessions Judge sentenced the appellants to suffer RI for 5(five) years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ each, with respect to the offence punishable under Section 452 of the IPC r/w Section 34 of the IPC, to suffer RI for 5 (years) and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ each with respect to the offence punishable under Section 395 of the IPC. She sentenced the appellant Mohd. Kasif to suffer RI for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.7,000/ in respect of the offence punishable under section 397 of the IPC. Being aggrieved by their conviction and the sentences imposed upon them, the appellants have approached this Court by filing the above separate Appeals.

(2.) The prosecution case, as put forth before the trial Court as can be gathered from the FIR, the statements recorded during investigation and the evidence adduced, in brief, be stated thus :

(3.) I have heard Mr.Amit Gharte, the learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1084/13. As the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.220/15 had preferred the Appeal from prison, and as he had not appointed any Advocate, Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, Advocate was appointed to prosecute the said Appeal under the Free Legal Aid Scheme. I have also heard Mr.Deepak Thakre, learned APP for the State.