JUDGMENT - SAHAI VISHNU, J.:---Since both these appeals arise out of the same set of facts and a common impugned judgment we propose disposing them of together.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 473 of 1984, has been preferred by the Appellant, the State of Maharashtra, against the acquittal of Respondent Vinayak Tukaram Utekar for an offence punishable under section 397, Indian Penal Code and of Respondent No. 2 Kashiram Shankar More, for the offence punishable under section 397 read with 34, Indian Penal Code. The said judgment of acquittal was passed on 6th March, 1984, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 4 of 1984.

By the said Judgment the Additional Sessions Judge convicted Vinayak Tukaram Utekar for the offences under sections 379 and 324, Indian Penal Code, instead of 397, Indian Penal Code and gave him the benefit of section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Criminal Appeal No. 474 of 1984 has been preferred by the State of Maharashtra against the order releasing Respondent Vinayak Tukaram Utekar under section 360, Criminal Procedure Code.

3. It would be pertinent to point mention that Criminal Appeal No. 473 of 1984, so far as it relates to Respondent No. 2, Kashiram Shankar More was dismissed by this Court at the time of admission vide orders dated 18-6-1985.

4. We begin this appeal with a note of anguish. In spite of the fact that the matter has been on the Board for a sufficiently long time Mr. Y. J. Master, learned counsel for the Respondent, in both the appeals, is not available. Since these appeals pertain to the year 1984 and 13 years have elapsed we yesterday appointed Mrs. Revati Mohite Dere as counsel for the Respondent. We are grateful to her for having accepted this duty.

5. The factual matrix from which these appeals germinate is as under :

The informant-victim Hemant Ramchandra Holkar (P.W.1) is a resident of Thane District. At about 9 p.m. on 26th January, 1981, he and his friend Anant Iyer (P.W.2) had gone for walking. At about midnight they reached the Thane Railway Station where from a handcart, outside the station, they ate bread and Batata-Vada. Thereafter they went to the tea stall situated on platform No. 1 of Thane Railway Station and took tea. At that time three persons came. One of them namely Respondent Vinayak caught hold of his shirt and snatched three gold buttons therefrom. The informant caught the hand of the Respondent Vinayak. He tried to run away. However, the informant succeeded in apprehending him. Respondent Vinayak took out a knife from the back pocket of his trousers and with it inflicted a blow on the shoulder of the informant. A grappling between him and the informant took place. Ultimately both fell down on the ground. In the meantime Anant Iyer snatched the knife from the person of Vinayak. In the trial Court he identified the said knife (Article 2). He also picked up the gold buttons from the ground. Thereafter both the informant and Vinayak started shouting Police - Police.

With knife and buttons Anant Iyer rushed to the outpost of the R.P.F. situated at the station. He contacted Senior Rakshak Awad Bihari Singh (P.W.3). Along with Anant Iyer, Awad Bihari Singh, came on the place of the incident. He found two persons lying on the ground. Respondent Vinayak was trying to extricate himself from the clutches of the informant-victim.

Awad Bihari Singh apprehended the Respondent Vinayak. The other two associates of Vinayak ran away. Respondent Vinayak was taken to the R.P.F. out post on platform No. 2.

6. Meanwhile the informant Hemant Ramchandra Holkar was sent to Civil Hospital, Thane. At about 12-45 p.m. he was examined by Dr. Govind Mahadeo Kolge (P.W.4), who found that he had sustained an injury of the dimensions of 3 x 2” x 3, which was attributable to a sharp cutting object. The said injury was possible by the knife shown to him.

7. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Hemant Ramchandra Holkar (P.W.1) and on its basis P.S.I. Sidheshwar Ramchandra Digol

Click Here to Read the rest of this document