JUDGMENT :

VINAY JOSHI, J.

Heard learned counsels appearing for the convicted appellants/accused, additional public prosecutor for the State, and learned counsels appearing for the victim. Perused the entire record, written notes of argument, as well as both impugned judgments. Carefully considered rival submissions and position of law.

2. Unpredicted Incident of attempted robbery and murder dated 06.10.2012, gave rise to multiple appeals. Initially, in all five accused were tried in Special Cri. Case No. 4/2013 for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397, 398, 307, 302, Section 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 and 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, and Sections 3(1)(i), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (‘MCOC Act’). One of the miscreant namely Darasingh @ Dharasingh @ Satwantsingh s/o Vakilsingh Bawari @ Sikalkari went absconding. On his apprehension he was tried separately in Special MCOC Case No. 1/2015 for the same charge. Precisely, both sides expressed their dissatisfaction to the separate judgments delivered by the Trial Court which gave raise to seven appeals.

3. Special Cri. Case No. 4/2013 was tried against five accused namely Accused No.1 Bannasingh @ Rupsingh s/o Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri, Accused No.2 Darasingh s/o Mirsingh Bawri, Accused No. 3 Lakhansingh s/o. Mirsingh Bawri, Accused No. 4 Pankajsingh s/o Kalusingh Dudhani and Accused No. 5 Julfisingh @ Surajsingh @ Bambai s/o. Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Daulatsingh Bawri. After appreciating the evidence, the Trial Court held Accused No. 1 Bannasingh @ Rupsingh s/o Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 398 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 5 Julfisingh @ Surajsingh @ Bambai s/o. Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Daulatsingh was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 398 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 4 Pankajsingh s/o Kalusingh Dudhani was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 393, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. However, Accused No. 2 Darasingh s/o Mirsingh Bawri and Accused No. 3 Lakhansingh s/o. Mirsingh Bawri were acquitted from all the charges.

4. The Trial Court has imposed separate punishment for each of the offences proved. The maximum sentence awarded to Accused Nos. 1 Bannasingh @ Rupsingh s/o Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri, and Accused No. 5 Julfisingh @ Surajsingh @ Bambai s/o. Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Daulatsingh was to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine, for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, whilst maximum punishment for Accused No. 4 Pankajsingh s/o Kalusingh Dudhani was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years, for the offence punishable under Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code. Besides that, certain amount of fine was imposed on each count with stipulation of default. The Trial Court directed that all the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

5. Absconding Accused Darasingh @ Dharasingh @ Satwantsingh s/o Vakilsingh Bawari @ Sikalkari was tried separately in Special MCOC Case no. 1/2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397, 398, 307, 302, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 and 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, Sections 3(1)(i), 3(2), 3(4) of the MCOC Act. The Trial Court equally convicted him for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 398, read with Section 34 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The maximum sentence was of imprisonment for life, for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, along with fine. All sentences