1. These two appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment, as the same take exception to the self-same judgment and Order passed by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Pune dated 10th May, 2004 in Sessions Case No.120 of 2003. Criminal Appeal No.927 of 2004 is filed by Accused No.8, whereas Criminal Appeal No.845 of 2004 is filed by accused Nos. 1 to 7, 9 to 13. All the accused/appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under section 395 of I.P.Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of 5(five) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-each in default R.I. for a period of three months.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on the fateful night, the complainant Anil Babanrao Rajguru(P.W.1) was employed as driver in the company where Dr.Sumantran was the Executive Director. On 3rd October, 2002 at about 6 a.m. the complainant and Dr.V.Sumantran left for Mumbai by car from Pune. On 4th October, 2002 after the official meeting of Dr.V. Sumantran concluded, they left for Pune from Worli, Mumbai by road at about 6.45 p.m.. It is the prosecution case that car had reached at the spot where the incident is alleged to have taken place at around 9.30 p.m. T