JUDGMENT - MAJITHIA G.R., J.:---Vilas Vasantrao Patil, the appellant-original accused No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “the original accused No. 1”), has challenged his conviction and sentence recorded in Sessions Case No. 933 of 1991 by Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, vide judgment and order dated December 10, 1993. He was convicted under section 392 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R. I. for 5 years. He was also convicted under section 397 read with section 392, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years. He was further convicted under section 4 read with section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one month. He was also convicted under section 414 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The original accused No. 1, Sharmaraj Pandian Nadar - original accused No. 2, Santosh Babu Shetty - original accused No. 3, and Ashok Rajaram Wadekar - original accused No. 4, were charged under section 395 in the alternative under section 392 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Original accused Nos. 1 and 2 were separately charged under section 397 read with section 395, Indian Penal Code for having been armed with swords while committing robbery. Original accused Nos. 1 and 2 were also charged under section 4 read with section 27 of the Arms Act. Additional charge was also framed against original accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 under section 414 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code for having concealed property acquired under robbery.

3. Original accused No. 1 was convicted and sentenced as stated supra. All the sentences imposed upon him in this case and in the connected cases were ordered to run concurrently. He was allowed the set-off for the period from July 10, 1991 to December 9, 1993 for his detention as an under-trial.

Original accused Nos. 3 and 4 were convicted under section 392 read with section 34 and under section 414 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each was sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and R.I. for six months, respectively. All the sentences imposed upon them in this case and in the connected cases were ordered to run concurrently. They were allowed the set-off for the period from July 12, 1991 to October 13, 1993 and from July 12, 1991 to December 9, 1993, respectively, for their detention as under-trials. Consequently, they had undergone the sentences imposed on them. Original accused No. 2 was convicted under section 392 read with section 34, under section 397 read with section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4 read with section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years, R.I. for 7 years and R.I. for one month, respectively. All the sentences imposed upon him in this case and in the connected cases were ordered to run concurrently. He was allowed the set-off for the period from July 10, 1991 to September 16, 1993 for his detention as an under-trial. He challenged his conviction and sentence in this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 1994. During the pendency of the appeal he expired and the appeal stood abated. The appeal filed by him was rendered infructuous as a result of his death and was disposed of as such.

4. The prosecution story is unfolded by PW 4-Bhagwan Narayan More. He lodged the F.I.R. at Bhandup Police Station on July 22, 1991 at 5.30 p.m. and the same was registered at C.R. No. 352/1991. He stated in his complaint that he along with his family was residing at Ramdhan Chawl, Sharma Niwas, Jangal Mangal Road, Bhandup (West), Bombay for the last 17 years. He was working in Hindustan Hosiery Mills Company in its socks knitting department at Lalbag, Kala Chowkie Marg on temporary basis for the last 7 months. On the date of the incident, namely, July 9, 1991, he was working in the second shift which was from 3.30 p.m. to 12 midnight. On that day, he reported for duty in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document