RAM KASHINATH KIR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/accused, by this appeal, is challenging the judgment and order dated 26 th August 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, in Sessions Case No.508 of 2014, thereby convicting the appellant/accused of the offence punishable under Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code, and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years apart from directing him to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 4 months.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the prosecution and resultant conviction of the appellant/accused can be summarized thus :

(3.) I have heard Shri Lalla, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused at sufficient length of time. He argued that PW2 Sandhya and PW3 Maya had turned hostile. There is no evidence to connect the appellant/accused to the crime in question. The learned counsel further argued that though the appellant/accused is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code, sentence imposed upon him is highly disproportionate, and therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed.