ANANDA D PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two appellants in this Criminal Appeal are original accused Nos. 1 and 2. They along with accused Nos. 3 and 4 were charged for offences punishable under section 452 read with section 34 and section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 1 was separately charged for the offence under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 2 was separately charged for the offences under sections 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 were separately charged under section 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code respectively.

(2.) The learned Sessions Judge, Jalgaon by his judgement and order dated 27th June, 1975 convicted accused No. 1 under section 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. Accused No. 1 was further convicted under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Accused No. 2 was convicted under section 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. He was also convicted under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 were convicted under sections 452 and 324 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and instead of sentencing them at once to any punishment, they were released under section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. All the accused were acquitted of the rest of the charges brought against them. Substantive sentences of accused Nos. 1 and 2 was ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are brothers and accused No. 4 is their distant relation. All of them hail from village Lasure and so do prosecution witnesses. The map (Ex. 5) shows the location of the houses of the accused and the prosecution witnesses. Most of them are living near to each other and can, therefore, be loosely described as neighbours.