MARUTI GANGADHAR MALI Vs. STATE F MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this appeal, the appellants-orig.accused Nos.1 to 5 have challenged the judgment and order dated 9.9.1991 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.84 of 1990. By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under Sections 147, 148, 325, 324, 337 r/w. 149 of Indian Penal Code. For the offence under Section 147, 148 & 324 of IPC each of the appellants was sentenced to suffer RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default RI for six months. For the offence under Section 325 IPC each of the appellants came to be sentenced to suffer RI for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in default RI for one year. For the offence under Section 337 each of the appellants came to be sentenced to RI for six months and to pay fine of Rs.500 in default RI for 45 days. The learned Sessions Judge directed that the substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.

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

(3.) Charge came to be framed against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 302 r/w. 149, 337 r/w.149 & 324 r/w. 149 of IPC. All the accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused persons is that as the civil Court had granted injunction in their favour they had a right to pass through the land. Despite the accused persons having the right, the family of the complainant objected to it and they were infact assaulted by Namdeo, Sukhdeo and other witnesses by sticks and stones. In the incident, all the accused persons received injuries. As they were assaulted first, in order to save themselves they have exercised the right of private defence due to which the witnesses sustained injuries. After going through the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned Sessions Judge, convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated in para-1 above. Hence, this Appeal.