VIJAY JANAPPA AHIRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/accused No. 1 has challenged the Judgment and order dated 30.8.2003 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, whereby he, along with two other accused persons, was convicted for the offence punishable under section 395 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for two months and also for the offence punishable under section 397 I.P.C. he was sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. For one month.

(2.) To state in brief, the prosecution case is that the present accused along with four other persons had hired Tata Sumo Jeep at Chakan, Dist. Pune to go to Shirdi for a pilgrimage. P.W. 1 Ramdas Karpe was the driver of the Jeep. The Jeep left Chakan on 3.1.2002 at about 10 a.m. and reached Shirdi at about 2 p.m. Besides the driver P.W. 1 Ramdas Karpe, five other passengers, one lady by name Kaushalya and two children were also travelling by that Jeep. After reaching at Shirdi, the Jeep was parked in the parking space within the campus of Saibaba Trust. The driver was given Rs. 50/- to take his lunch. The accused persons and that lady went to the temple and they returned at about 8 p.m. After that the lady was accommodated in the rest house of Saibaba Trust. The other five men asked the driver Ramdas Karpe to take them to Nashik. After seeking permission from the employer, the driver took them to Nashik. On the way, they halted at Saivijay Hotel at Shirdi Sinnar Road for taking dinner. After taking dinner, they proceeded ahead. After they had covered a distance of about 20 kms. from the said hotel, two of the passengers asked the driver to stop the Jeep and they got down. However, the engine of the Jeep was on. One of those persons asked the driver to switch-off the engine. The driver asked them as to why it snould be switched off, on this one of the passengers, who was in the Jeep, threw a nylon rope around his neck and tried to strangulate him. Other persons sitting in the Jeep kicked him out of the Jeep. Therefore, the driver fell down on the road and started running towards Sinnar for his protection. One Qualis vehicle came from Sinnar side. The driver Ramdas gave a signal to that vehicle for help and the said vehicle stopped. At that time, the accused persons escaped from the spot with the said Jeep. Driver Ramdas informed the Vavi Police Station from one S.T.D. Booth at Village Pangri about this incident. After about 40 minutes, the police came in a jeep. The police party consisted of A.P.I. Desai and four constables. They saw the concerned Jeep and stopped it by stopping the police jeep in front of that Jeep. When the police party was proceeding towards that jeep, suddenly one of the persons in the Jeep started firing on the police. In retaliation, the police also fired and two of those persons were injured and finally died because of the bullet injuries. The remaining three persons, including the present appellant, were arrested at the spot and about the assault on driver Ramdas and theft of the Jeep, an offence under section 395 read with section 3971.P.C. came to be registered, but for firing against the police, a separate case under section 307 I.P.C. was registered. According to the prosecution, during personal search, deadly weapons, like Kukri, were seized under a panchnama. After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. Charge was framed against all the thee accused for the offences punishable under section 395 and 397 I.P.C. The accused pleaded not guilty. According to them, they were falsely implicated in this case. According to them, two of the persons of their group had consumed alcohol at the hotel and therefore at some distance from that hotel, thej had started vomiting. Therefore, the Jeep was stopped. The police party came there and or suspicion without any justification, started firing in which those two persons were killed Only to justify the firing, the police made the driver of the jeep to lodge a false report and thus, the police registered two false cases against them, one under sections 395 and 397 and another under section 307 I.P.C.

(3.) On behalf of the prosecution, in all 8 witnesses were examined. After hearing the evidence and the arguments by the parties, the trial Court convicted and sentenced all the three accused as stated above.