JUDGMENT - BHAIRAVIA V.H., J.:---This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29-11-1993 passed by the learned Second Additional Judge, Satara, in Sessions Case No. 131 of 1992, whereby the appellants have been held guilty for offences punishable under section 304-A read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and section 330 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer further S.I. for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer S.I. for one month for offence punishable under section 304-A read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and also sentenced each of them to suffer S.I. for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer further S.I. for one month. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 9-12-1990 the appellant-accused No. 1 was working as P.S.I., appellant-accused No. 2 was working as Police Head Constable and appellants-accused Nos. 3 to 5 were working as police constables. All of them were attached to Vaduj Police Station. It is the further prosecution case that Crime No. 125/90 of theft was registered with the said Police Station and the investigation into the said crime was entrusted with appellant-accused No. 2. It is the prosecution case that one Rikavalya (now deceased) and his brother Varisarya were living at Vaduj. It is stated that on 6-12-1990 at 2.30 p.m. deceased Rikavalya was taking his wife Ruki to the hospital as she was pregnant and running eight months and was complaining pain in her stomach. When both of them along with Varisarya, the brother of deceased Rikavalya, reached near Vaduj Police Station, appellants-accused Nos. 3 to 5, who were keeping a watch over the culprits in respect of the aforesaid crime, they were stopped there and both deceased Rikavalya and his brother Varisarya were taken to the Police Station. The wife of the deceased Rikavalya also gone to the Police Station. It is alleged that in the Police Station the deceased and his brother were beaten by the police since they were suspecting these two persons to be the persons involved in the offence of theft, but they were not admitting the guilt and, therefore, they were put up in the police lock up. On the next day, both of them were produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vaduj, who remanded both of them to police custody for seven days. It is alleged that on 9-12-1990 these two persons and some other persons were in the police lock up. Police Head Constable Ankush Shinde and other Police Constables were on guard duty of the police lock up on that day. It is further alleged that the appellants-accused persons closed the door of the office of P.S.I. from inside and started beating both the persons by stick on their back and private parts and other parts of their body, but even then, they did not admit the guilt. Thereafter one table, one chair and two pairs of handcuffs were brought there. These handcuffs were put on the hands of both these persons. Then the appellants-accused persons put lathi between both arms of these persons and thereafter chairs were put on the table. On the said chairs both these persons were hanged, by which act both them got strain on their stomach. Thereafter they were given beating by the appellants-accused persons. By this beating deceased Rikavalya became unconscious and, therefore, the beating was stopped. The handcuffs of both these persons were taken out. Both of them were taken back to the lock up room. Appellant-accused No. 2 asked the Police Constable to keep both of them in two different lock up and they were put accordingly. It is alleged that at about 11.15 p.m. one constable from the guard duty of the lock up went to D.W. 7 Ankush Shinde and told him that Rikavalya was complaining that he was getting pain in his stomach. That was reported to Thane Amaldar Dagde in writing. Therefore, he deputed two Constables for taking Rikavalya to the hospita

Click Here to Read the rest of this document