Vyankatesh Yelugure Shirke vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 16677 Bom

                     Megha                            15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.463 OF 1997
        Digitally
        signed by
MEGHA   MEGHA S
        PARAB
S       Date:
PARAB   2021.12.04
        17:09:28

                     Taya Tama Varganti                             ...Appellant
        +0530




                                   Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra                      ...Respondent
                                                 WITH
                                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.431 OF 1997

                     Vyankatesh Yelgure Shirke                      ...Appellant
                                   Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra                      ...Respondent
                                                         ....
                     Ms Akshata Desai i/b. Mr. Nitin Sejpal for the Appellant
                     Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for Respondent-State in Apeal/431/1997.
                     Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for Respondent-State in Apeal/463/1997


                                                 CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED: 2nd DECEMBER, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

By these appeals fled under Section 374 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Appellants (hereinafter referred to as

accused Nos.1 and 3) have challenged the judgment dated 11/07/1997

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in

Sessions Case No.1022 of 1994.

2. By the impugned judgment, the learned Judge has held the

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

the accused Nos.1 and 3 guilty of ofences punishable under Section

392 r/w. 34 of the IPC and sentenced them to sufer rigorous

imprisonment for fve years and fne of Rs.500/- i/d. to sufer rigorous

imprisonment for 3 months.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 25/3/1994 the

Complainant Vijay P. Shinde (PW1) had gone to Sanjay Gandhi National

Park along with his wife and son. At about 3.45 p.m. while they were

sitting near the Crocodile Park, three persons came towards them. One

of the persons pointed knife at the wife of the Complainant and the

other person snatched the gold chain around his neck. The gold chain

broke and the accused could take away only a piece of the chain along

with the pendant. The Complainant and the other members of public

chased the said accused persons and caught them and handed them

over to the police, who had arrived at the scene of ofence. The police

had recovered piece of chain from the accused No.1. The Complainant-

Vijay Shinde lodged the FIR against the accused, pursuant to which

crime was registered against these two accused and the co-accused -

Durga Varganti, who was allegedly armed with a knife. The accused

were taken into custody. The statements of the witnesses were

recorded and upon completion of the investigation charge sheet was

fled against the accused for ofences punishable under Sections 394,

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

395 and 397 of the IPC.

4. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be

tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined 7 witnesses. The

statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

Defence of the accused was that of total denial. Upon appreciating and

analysing the evidence on record the learned Judge held all the three

accused guilty of ofence under Section 392 r/w 34 of the IPC and

sentenced them to sufer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. Accused

No.2, who was an under trial prisoner, was also convicted for ofence

under Section 397 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for 7 years. He has not challenged the judgment. The

present appeal has been fled by the accused Nos.1 and 3 under Section

374 of the Cr.P.C.

5. Heard Ms Akshata Desai, learned counsel for the accused

Nos.1 and 3 and Mr.S.V. Gavand and Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, learned APP for

Respondent-State in the respective appeals. I have perused the records

and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the

respective parties.

6. The short point for my consideration is whether the

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

prosecution has established that these accused alongwith accused No.2

had committed robbery on 25/3/1994. In this regard the evidence of

PW1-Vijay Shinde reveals that on the relevant date he along with his

wife and son had gone to Sanjay Gandhi National Park. He has stated

that at 3.45 p.m. while they were sitting near the Crocodile Park, the

accused came near them. The accused No.2 pointed a knife at his wife

and the accused No.1 snatched his gold chain. He has deposed that the

chain broke and the accused No.1 could take only a piece of chain with

the locket. He has stated that all the three accused ran away from the

spot. He and his wife shouted for help and with the help of the

members of public caught the three accused. In the meantime, police

arrived at the spot. They handed over custody of the accused to the

police. The police recovered a piece of gold chain and locket from the

accused No.1. The police also seized the knife used by accused No.2 in

commission of the crime.

7. PW2-Adhar Mahadu Sonawane was working in the National

Park as a watchman. This witness has also deposed that on 25/03/1994

he was on duty at Sanjay Gandhi National Park from 9.00 a.m. to 4.00

a.m. He has stated that he resides in the park near Lion Safari area.

While he was at home, he heard the members of the public shouting

"chor chor". He saw some people gathered near Crocodile Park. He has

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

stated that all the three accused persons were caught by the members

of the public and they were beaten as they were involved in snatching a

chain.

8. PW3-Kashinath is also a watchman working in Sanjay Gandhi

National Park. This witness has also stated that on 25-3-1994 at 4.00

p.m. after fnishing his duty he was proceeding at his residence. He saw

the accused running. The Complainant and other members of public

were shouting "chor, chor" and were chasing the accused. They caught

the accused and assaulted them and later handed them over to the

police. He has stated that the police recovered a piece of gold chain

with one locket from the accused No.1.

9. PW5- Parsuram is a police personnel, who was on duty at

Sanjay Gandhi National Park. He has deposed that while he was

proceeding towards Crocodile park he saw the accused running in the

opposite direction. He saw the Complainant and the other members of

public chasing them. They were shouting "chor, chor" and some of the

members of the public was shouting "pakdo, pakdo". He has deposed

that he and the other two watchmen of the Sanjay Gandhi National

Park caught all the three accused. Some of the members of the public

assaulted them as they were involved in snatching the gold chain. He

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

has stated that in the meantime police on patrolling duty arrived at the

spot. They handed over the accused persons to the police. He has

deposed that personal search of the accused was taken and a piece of

gold chain with locket was recovered from accused No.1.

10. On 25/03/1994 PW7-API-Sambhaji Patil was on duty in

patrolling van. He has deposed that at about 4.00 p.m. when the police

van had reached near the Crocodile Park, they saw a crowd gathered

near the park. PW5 was also present at the site. When he went to the

spot of the incident he was told that the accused persons, who were

caught by the public, had snatched a gold chain of the Complainant. He

has deposed that he had taken personal search of accused in presence

of PW7 and recovered a piece of gold chain with a pendant from the

accused No.1.

11. The evidence of the Complainant amply proves that on

25/03/1994, he, his wife and son had been to Sanjay Gandhi National

Park and were sitting near the Crocodile Park. The evidence on record

indicates that the accused accosted PW1, the accused No.2 pointed a

knife at the wife of the Complainant and accused No.1 snatched his

gold chain. The chain had broken and the accused No.1 had taken the

piece of gold chain and the locket. The evidence adduced by the

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

prosecution amply proves that the accused Nos.1 and 3 were caught

while they were running away and a piece of gold chain was recovered

from the accused No.1. There is no reason to doubt the credibility of

the Complainant and the other witnesses, who are independent

witnesses and have no reason to falsely implicate the accused. Thus,

the evidence adduced by the prosecution proves that the accused Nos.1

and 3 had committed robbery within the meaning of Section 390 of the

IPC. I do no fnd any infrmity in the judgment or any other valid reason

to interfere with the conviction.

12. As regards the quantum of sentence, it is stated that as on

the date of the ofence the accused Nos.1 and 3 were young boys in

their early twenties. They had committed the crime possibly led by

poverty, illiteracy and misguidance resulting due to impressionable

young age. They were in custody for about fve months. Subsequent to

their release on bail, they have married. These accused, who are now in

their ffties have settled in life with their respective families.

Considering this fact and considering the time lag, in my considered

view the sentence imposed against accused Nos.1 and 3 needs to be

reduced to the sentence undergone.

13. Under the circumstances, the appeals are partly allowed.

Megha 15_apeal_431_1997 withapeal_463_1997.doc

The conviction of accused Nos.1 and 3 is maintained while the sentence

is reduced from 5 years to the sentence undergone by the accused

Nos.1 and 3.

(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)