RAJESHKUMAR KUNJBIHAARI DWIVEDI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, original accused has challenged the judgment and order dated 31st Aug. 2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No.392 of 2003 thereby convicting the appellant under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.500.00. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The appellant has further been convicted under Sec. 449 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.300.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. The Trial Court has directed that all the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. It is to be noted here that the co-accused Michel Chakravarty Patel is absconding since the date of commission of offence and therefore the Trial Court has directed that the muddemal property which was seized under panchanama (Exhibit 33-A) be handed over to the complainant on a bond that he shall produce the same whenever ordered by the Court. It is to be noted here that the Superintendent of Nashik Central Prison has submitted a report through the learned APP stating that the appellant was released on parole leave on 27.6.2008 for a period of 30 days and since then he has not returned to the jail and is absconding. She further submitted that crime bearing no.00 of 2014 under Sec. 224 has been registered against the appellant at Nashik Road Police Station.

(2.) The facts which can be enumerated from the record and are necessary to decide the present appeal can briefly be stated thus:

(3.) Heard Mrs. Nasreen S.K. Ayubi, Advocate appointed for the appellant and Ms. R.M. Gadhvi, the learned APP for the State and with their assistance we have perused the entire record pertaining to the present case.