POLISHA GANPAT PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by accused No. 1 takes exception to the Judgment and Order passed by the with additional Sessions Judge, Nashik dated April 12, 2002 in Sessions Case no. 175 of 2001. The appellant along with two other accused was charge-sheeted and tried for offence punishable under sections 395, 397, 457, 380, 342, 427 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code (hereinafter referred to as the 'ipc')

(2.) The prosecution case is that two more accused were involved in the commission of the crime in question, but as they were absconding, the trial proceeded only in respect of three accused. Insofar as accused Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, they had filed separate appeal against order of conviction and sentence dated 2nd April, 2002. However, it appears that their Appeal has been dismissed for non-prosecution.

(3.) As mentioned earlier, the present Appeal is filed by accused No. 1 through jail. The prosecution case is that on the night of 16th July, 2001, when the Investigating Officer Sudam Dada Walke was doing night patrolling duty at 22. 30 hours, he was proceeding towards vavi, Nandur Shingote accompanied by police constables Thakare and Khairnar and the jeep was near Village Pangri, they received message on wireless from a. S. I. Bhandagale of Sinnar Police station that there was information that thieves have come to the house of haribhau Londhe near Kela Factory, Sinnar. On receiving such wireless message, the said police party proceeded towards the field of Haribhau Londhe. It was learnt that the thieves had proceeded towards M. I. D. C. , however, they could not be traced. That around 2. 15 hours, a. S. I. Bhandagale gave call that he received message that the accused had come to Kande Mala. Accordingly, the police party headed by Sudam Dada Walke, police Inspector (PW 8) went to kande Mala and noticed the damage done by the thieves. Again at 4. 15 hours, another wireless message was received from a. S. I. Bhandagale that information has been received from one Laxman golesar that there was theft in the house of his servant Haribhau Sayaji Gode (PW 1) and that Haribhau Gode was severely beaten by the accused, and his property was stolen. Accordingly, the police party proceeded towards the field of Prabhakar laxman Golesar. When they reached the spot, they were informed that injured haribhau Gode was taken to clinic of dr. Atre at Sinnar. The police party inspected the house of Haribhau Gode and noticed that one quilt in the house was drenched with blood, the household articles were found scattered. The police party made attempt to trace the culprits. P. W. 8 issued directions to A. S. I. Bhandagale to record the First Information report (F. I. R. ) of Haribhau Gode who was in the clinic of Dr. Atre at the relevant time. It is alleged that when P. W. 8 was chasing the culprits on Nashik-Pune Road, when the police jeep reached near ghulewadi Shiva, they noticed six male persons and four women were walking on the streets with bundles of clothes on their heads and some of them were having bags in their hands. As p. W. 8 entertained some doubt, the said persons were asked to stop, but on seeing the police jeep, the said persons started running away. The police party, however, caught hold of three culprits and the remaining four/five persons fled away. The police party took personal search of accused in the presence of panch and it was noticed that accused No. 1 was found in possession of 56 items, consisting cash amount, gold ornaments, clothes and wrist watches. One kukri and one dagger were also found in possession of accused no. 1. Articles were recovered from other accused as well. The said articles including gold and silver ornaments were identified by P. W. I Haribhau Sayaji Gode and P. W. 5 Sakhubai Haribhau Gode. Suffice it to observe that after the investigation was complete, charge-sheet came to be filed and the matter was committed to the Sessions Court at Nasik for trial. The accused were charge-sheeted for the offence referred to in the earlier part of the Judgment. The trial Court framed following charge :