SUBHASH NAMDEO PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these appeals, the appellants/original accused have challenged their conviction by the II Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad in Sessions Case No.5 of 1999, sentencing them on various offences.

(2.) Criminal Appeal No.109 of 2003 has filed by accused nos.2,4 and 6 who have been convicted under section 326 read with 149 IPC for three years imprisonment and others by lessor punishment. Criminal Appeal No. 110 of 2003 has filed by accused nos. 1,3 and 5 who have been convicted by the learned trial Judge to suffer imprisonment for life under section 302 read with 149 of the I.P.C.

(3.) The Sessions trial was one, the impugned order is one, but the conviction is different. In one appeal (i.e. Cri.Appeal No.109/03) the accused have been convicted to suffer R.I. for three years and therefore it is liable to be heard by a learned single Judge of this court whereas in Cri.Appeal No.110/03 the accused are convicted to suffer imprisonment for life and their appeal is liable to be heard by a Division Bench. Taking into consideration the fact that the judgment and trial is same, these appeals are heard by the Division Bench. With the assistance of the learned advocate for the accused and the learned Addl.P.P. we have reappreciated the entire evidence on record. We have scrutinised the documents on record. The prosecution case as disclosed by this re-appreciation stated briefly is as under: