MADHUKAR DAMU PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : The appellant aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 26th June, 1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Dhule in Sessions case No. 76 of 1991 convicting and sentencing him (i) under section 328 read with 34, Indian Penal code to 5 years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further undergo two months R. I. and (ii) under section 379 read with 34, Indian Penal code to one year R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further undergo two months r. I. , the substantive sentences to run concurrently has come up in appeal before me.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief runs as follows : The informant Sumanbai Shankarrao Borase. P. W. 1 was a resident of Andheri, Bombay. On 23-5-1991, she was to proceed from Shirpur to Vikharan for attending a marriage. At about 10-10. 30 a. m. while she was at the S. T. Bus Stand at Shirpur, waiting to catch a bus for Vikharan, two unknown persons came near her and enquired from her as to where she was going. She replied that she was proceeding to Vikharan to attend a marriage. On that they told her that they were also going to attend the same marriage and started talking sweetly to her. All of them were sitting on a bench at the bus stand. While the appellant was sitting by her side his companion Ravindra Arjun Patil went and brought two glasses filled with sugarcane juice. Ravindra offered one glass to the informant and the other was consumed by him and the appellant. After the informant drank her glass of sugarcane juice Ravindra, the companion of the appellant, brought within five minutes another glass filled with sugarcane juice. The informant again started drinking the sugarcane juice. After she had consumed half the glass she started feeling uneasy and stopped drinking the juice further. She began losing consciousness and when she regained some of it, she found herself on the bridge, situate in village Bhamte and the appellant and his companion near her. At that time she was in a condition to comprehend as to what was happening. She saw the appellant and his companion removing the golden chapalahar and Mangalsutra, which she was wearing on her neck. She recognised them but, could not say anything as she was not fully conscious. At that time, a rickshaw puller came and asked the appellant and his companion whether they wanted to board the rickshaw to which, they replied in the negative. The rickshaw puller went away towards village Bhamte (old ). Within two minutes, he returned and noticed that the appellant and his companion were removing something from the neck of the informant. However, before the rickshaw puller could reach to her rescue, the appellant and his companion ran away. The rickshaw puller asked her as to where she wanted to go and on her telling him that she wanted to attend a wedding at vikharan in Patil community, the rickshaw puller dropped her at the place of marriage. There she told some persons that two unknown persons had stolen away her golden ornaments. Some amongst them left her to the house of her relation Balu at shirpur. Meanwhile, the same day at about 2. 30 p. m. in the taxi of Magan Ramchandra Bari (P. W. 3) the appellant and his companion Ravindra Patil left for Jalgaon along with the ornaments which they had stolen from P. W 1 Sumanbai. At Jalgaon, in the jewellery shop of Rajmal Lakhichand at about 5 or 5. 30 p. m. the same day, they sold the said ornaments and came back in the same taxi. On the way back, Ravindra Patil got down at village savkheda and the appellant at the bifurcation of the road known as Bhatpura Phata.

(3.) THE F. I. R. of the incident was lodged by sumanbai on 24-5-1995 at about 11 a. m. at Police station Shirpur. In the F. I. R. the description of the appellant and that of his companion has also been mentioned. On the basis of the F. I. R. Crime no. 62 of 1991, under section 379 read with 34, indian Penal Code was registered.