AJAGARALI ABDULRAJAK SHAIKH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal bearing No.41 of 2015 is filed by appellant/accused no.1 Ajagarali Shaikh, appellant/accused no.2 Jabbar Shaikh, appellant/accused no.3 Mehammad Akram Khan, appellant/accused no.5 Rahul Waghmare, appellant/accused no.7 Mangesh Sakat and appellant/accused no.8 Manoj Nair whereas Criminal Appeal bearing No.620 of 2013 is filed by appellant/accused no.6 Ramesh Akhade. They all along with acquitted accused no.4 Raju Vijay Bahadur Singh were tried for offences punishable under Sections 395 read with 397, 216A read with 34 and 411 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code , vide Sessions Cases Nos.49 of 2012, 241 of 2012 and 503 of 2012. By the impugned judgment and order dated 26 th April 2013, the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai, was pleased to convict the appellants/accused nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 8 of the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and similarly to convict appellants/accused nos.1, 2, 3 and 7 for the offence punishable under Section 395 read with Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code . They all came to be sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years by each of them, apart from payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- by each of them, and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 months. Appellant/accused no.6 Ramesh Akhade came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code and by the impugned judgment and order, he came to be sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years apart from payment of fine of Rs.500/-, and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months. The appellants/accused persons came to be acquitted of other offences with which they were charged.

(2.) Facts, in nutshell, leading to the prosecution of appellants/accused persons along with the co-accused are thus :

(3.) I have heard Shri Ganesh Bhujbal, the learned advocate appointed to represent the appellants/accused persons at the cost of the State. He vehemently argued that evidence of prosecution witnesses shows that there was darkness in the factory premises and the workers sleeping at the mezzanine floor were not in a position to look and witness what was going on at the ground floor of the factory. Two mobile phones and a knife allegedly recovered from appellant/accused no.5 Rahul Waghmare was not identified by any of the prosecution witnesses. He was handcuffed during recovery. No specific role was attributed to appellants/accused persons nos.1 to 3, so also other accused persons by the prosecution witnesses. Except appellant/accused no.7 Mangesh Sakat, nobody is said to have used weapons during the course of the alleged incident. The learned advocate for appellants/accused persons relied on the judgment in the matter of Gorakh Pandurang Mare and Another vs. State of Maharashtra; 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2912 and the judgment in the matter of Anand Anil Raimokar vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others; 2017 SCC Online Bom 7829.