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

2.Through Criminal Appeal No. 108 of 1996 the appellants Kashinath Ramchandra Patil and Sudhakar @ Manya Dattatraya Patil have impugned the judgment and order dated 30th January 1996, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad Alibaug convicting and sentencing them in the manner stated hereinafter.

Both under section 302 r.w. 34 I.P.C. to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, each, in default to undergo one year's R.I. each. In addition Kashinath Ramchandra Patil under section 324 I.P.C. to one year's R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo 6 months R.I.

The substantive sentences of appellant Kashinath Ramchandra Patil were directed to run concurrently.

It is pertinent to mention that along with the said appellants was tried accused Madhukar Ramchandra Patil for the offence under section 302 r.w. 34 I.P.C. but since he has been acquitted through the impugned judgment, the State of Maharashtra has impugned his acquittal through Criminal Appeal No. 353/96.

3.Shortly stated the prose

Click Here to Read the rest of this document