NANDLAL A PALIWAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waives service. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard both sides.

(2.) The Revision Application challenges the judgment and order dated 12.10.2006 delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati in Criminal Appeal No. 59 and 60 of 2005. By this judgment and order, which is common in the above appeals, the Learned Sessions Judge, Baramati has partly allowed the appeals preferred by the applicants before me. The Learned Judge has quashed and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court on the Applicants/Original Accused for the offence punishable under Section 500 read with 34 of IPC. However, the Learned Judge has upheld and maintained the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court in so far as the offence punishable under Section 501 and 502 read with 34 of IPC.

(3.) As is clear the applicants are the original accused. They were convicted by the trial court i.e. the Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baramati by Judgment and order dated 8.11.2005 in S.CT.No.1474 of 1988. The Trial Court held that the Applicants are guilty of the offences punishable under Section 500, 501, 502 read with S.34 IPC. He sentenced them to suffer simple Imprisonment for 3 months, 4 months and 4 months alongwith fine of Rs.500/- each for the above offences. The Lower Appellate court set aisde the conviction and sentence imposed under Section 500 read with Section 34 I.P.C. but maintained the other convictions and sentences under Section 501, 502 read with S.34 IPC.