T.V.NALAWADE, VIBHA KANKANWADI
ANNASAHEB @ MACCHINDRA PANDURANG @ MUKTAJI VAIDYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent
VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
1. Since both these appeals are arising out of the same Judgment and order, they are proposed to be disposed of by common Judgment. Criminal Appeal No. 260 of 2016 has been preferred by original accused No.1 to challenge his conviction under Section 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code awarded in Sessions Case No. 27 of 2005, by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner Dist. Ahmednagar on 05-11-2011, whereas Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 2012 has been preferred by the prosecution to challenge the acquittal of original accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Section 302, 201, 364, 362 of Indian Penal Code in the same case. Parties would be hereafter referred to as per their status before the Trial Court.
2. The prosecution has come with a case that, informant Suresh Rangnath Mandlik is resident of Sangamner. He had sister by name Taramati @ Tarabai Asaram Raut. Taramati was residing separately from her husband since about five to six years prior to 2005 with her son Mahesh at Sangamner. She was a vegetable vendor. Her daughter Rohini was married and was also residing at Dholewadi, Sangamner. It was the routine of Taramati to go to Nehru Chowk in Sang
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.