LAWRENCE JOHN LOBO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 22nd March 2004 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, gr. Bombay in Sessions trial No. 877 of 1992, the appellants named above have preferred this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal as also verbally canvassed before us.

(2.) WHEN the matter was called out the advocate appearing for the appellants was absent. We have noticed for the last three months in most of the cases where the parties are represented by lawyers engaged by them, remain absent and in number of cases we have observed this by taking up the hearing in the absence of the advocate, as it is necessary to avoid unnecessary languishing the accused persons in jail who may, after hearing and decision of the appeal, be found not guilty. With the assistance of the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned APP, we have scrutinised the entire record and reappreciated the evidence both oral and documentary on record.

(3.) THE prosecution case briefly stated is that one smt. Fatmabi and her three sons Salim, Chandmohammed, and Ismail resided together in Chawl No. 102, Pipe Line, kherwadi, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400 050. One daguther-in-law of Fatmabi also resided with them. The accused persons from Lobo family resided just in the same vicinity at the rear side of the road. About two months prior to the incident there was a quarrel between Chandmohammed, the son of the complainant and accused Andrew Lawrence Lobo and Freddie Lawrence Lobo.