HAMZA MOHD. IBRAHIM ANSARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Revision Application filed by the original accused in C.C.No.769/P/1987 on the file of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 18th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai. The Applicant was tried on the charges of commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the Penal Code as well as under Sec. 89(a)(b) of the The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. At the conclusion of the trial, vide Judgment and Order dated 20/03/2001, the Applicant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 279 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer S.I. for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to suffer S.I. for 2 months. The Applicant was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 337 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer S.I. for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default of payment of fine, to suffer S.I. for 1 month. The Applicant was acquitted from the charge of commission of offence punishable under Sec. 89(a)(b) of The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.

(2.) The Applicant had challenged the conviction and sentence by preferring Criminal Appeal No.112 of 2001 before the Court of Sessions for Greater Mumbai. The Appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, vide his Judgment and Order dated 6th June, 2002. The Applicant has challenged these orders in this Criminal Revision Application.

(3.) Brief facts as per the prosecution case are as follows : On 11th March, 1986 at about 9.35 a.m., one Yasin Charolia was going to her bank to deposit an amount of Rs.39,868.00. She was carrying a bag containing the cash amount. At that time, one person came near her and robbed her of the cash amount at the point of razor. According to the prosecution case, he was accompanied by his accomplices. All of them sat in a taxi bearing no.MRO 7515. The prosecution case is that the said taxi was driven by the present Applicant. The Applicant drove his taxi rashly and negligently and gave dash to 4 pedestrians who suffered injuries. The FIR was lodged by Yasin. The investigation was carried out and the police filed 3 charge-sheets i.e. C.C.Nos.768/P/87, 769/P/87 and 770/P/87. Out of them, two cases i.e. C.C.Nos.768/P/87 and 770/P/87 were committed to the Court of Sessions on 02/11/1988. The prosecution filed an application vide Exh.A in C.C.No.769/P/87 for committing that case also to the Court of Sessions. It was contended that C.C.No.769/P/87 should also be committed to the Court of Sessions since the evidence and witnesses were common with the other two cases. It was also contended that the evidence shows that there was possibility that all the accused had conspired to commit robbery. The learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 18th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai, vide his order dated 13/07/1990, rejected the application by observing that the incident concerning C.C.No.769/P/87 was not an incident arising out of the main incident of robbery. The learned Judge further observed that the offence of robbery was already completed before the accused sat in the taxi. He further observed that, therefore, the incident of accident could not be part of the same transaction and that there was no nexus between these two offences. The record shows that this order was not challenged and the present Applicant faced the trial in C.C.No.769/P/87 for the afore-mentioned offences.