RAMESH SHELAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment delivered by the Sessions Judge Nasik, convicting the appellant under sections 307 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Dwarkanath Joshi (P.W. 2) owned a taxi which he plied by engaging two drivers, viz. (1) Chandrakant Gojare (P.W. 1) and (2) Narayan Kalange (P.W. 3). Each of these two drivers plied the taxi on hire for one full day by rotation. On 12th November, 1972, Chandrakant Gojare took charge of the taxi at about 8 a.m. and he was to remain in possession of the taxi till 8 a.m. on 13th November, 1972. At about mid-night he parked the taxi at Bhadrakali Taxi Stand at Nasik and he was waiting for the passengers. The appellant-original accused No. 1 Ramesh Shelar, and original accused No. 3 Ganpat Bhaurao Joshi who were friends, approached Chandrakant and asked Chandrakant to give him Rs. 2/- or liquor. Chandrakant told them that he had neither money nor liquor. The appellant and Ganpat accused No. 3 then dragged Chandrakant out of the taxi and gave him first blows. They then forced him to sit on the rear seat of the taxi. Both of them sat on the seat of the taxi on his either side. The appellant then kicked the petrol can which was kept at the back of the front seat near the leg space of the rear seat. The petrol from the can was split in the taxi. It may be mentioned that the glass-panes of all the doors were pulled up earlier by Chandrakant. The rear right side door of the taxi had no handle from inside for opening the door. The rear door on the left side alone could be opened by the inside handle. The accused got out from the left door and then appellant lighted a match stick and threw it inside the taxi and closed the door of the taxi. The petrol caught fire. Chandrakant could not escape from the left side door as both the accused were standing near the door. He, therefore, got out from the right side of the door by breaking open that glass of the door. He then raised an alarm. People came there and extinguished the fire. Accused also helped them in extinguishing the fire. The appellant threatened Chandrakant and warned him not to make a report about it. Chandrakant then went to Makaji Chivadewale and applied medicine to the injuries that were sustained by him. Chandrakant and the two accused then slept near the Tonga stand which was a few feet away from the taxi stand. It may be mentioned that upholstry of the taxi was practically burnt causing damage of about Rs. 2,000/-. Dwarkanath Joshi (P.W. 2) came to the Taxi Stand at about 9 a.m. and saw the burnt taxi. Chandrakant told him all that had happened at the night. Both of them thereafter went to the Police Station and lodged a report (Ex. 6) at about 11.15 a.m. In that report he had implicated the father of the appellant also as a person who had come to the taxi stand and threatened Chandrakant not to make any report. The offence was registered by the police against the appellant, appellants father and Ganpat. The police draw up the panchnama (Ex. 13) of the scene of offence. After completing the investigation, they filed a charge-sheet against the accused under sections 307 and 435 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After going through the papers, the learned Magistrate, committed the accused to face their trial before the Sessions Court, Nasik.

(3.) At the trial, the Sessions Judge framed charges under section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 435 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused. He also framed charges against accused No. 1 Ramesh for an offence punishable under sections 307 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code. The charges were read over the explained to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to tried.