AMARJEETSINGH KARTARSINGH MAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellant - original accused no.2 against the judgment and order dated 30.4.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 108 of 2001. By the said judgment and order, the appellant along with original accused no. 1 - Kailashkumar Virbahadur, accused no. 3 Guljarsingh @ Rinku Mahendrasingh Kodiyari, accused no.4 - Pankajkumar Kisan Kewat and accused no.5 - Leharilal Girdarilal Gujar have been convicted for the offence under Sections 395, 396 read with Section 120-B, 302 read with Section 120-B and 364 read with Section 120-B of IPC. For the offence under Section 395 of IPC, each of them has been sentenced to R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.1000/- in default R.I. for one month. For the offence under Section 396 read with Section 120-B of IPC, each of them has been sentenced to R.I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- each i/d R.I. for two months. For the offence under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC, each of them has been sentenced to R.I. for life and fine of Rs.3000/- i/d R.I. for three months. All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under:

(3.) Charge came to be framed against the appellant and five other accused i.e. original accused No. 1, and 3 to 6. The charge was framed under Section 120-B of IPC, under Section 395 r/w. Section 120-B of IPC, under Section 396 r/w. 120-B of IPC, under Section 302 r/w. 120-B of IPC or in the alternative under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC, under Section 364 r/w Section 120-B of IPC or in the alternative under Section 364 r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Section 412 of IPC. All the accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. Their defence is that of total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant along with original accused Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5as stated in paragraph-1 above, hence, this appeal. It may be stated here that accused nos.1 to 6 were acquitted of the offence under Section 364 read with Section 120-B of IPC or in the alternative under Section 364 read with Section 34 of IPC.