IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.47 OF 2016

1) Asid Amir Jahagirdar Age: 41 Yrs., occu. Labour, 2) Shaikh Mansoor Sk.Gani, Age: 50 Yrs., occu. Labour, 3) Sayarabi Sk. Asid Jahagirdar, Age: 40 Yrs., occu. Housewife, 4) Taymunbi Shaikh Mansoor, age: 47 Yrs., occu. Housewife, All 1 to 4 R/o Balanagar, Tq.Paithan, Dist.Aurangabad.

5) Sima Sk.Shakir, Age: 27 Yrs., occu. Housewife, R/o Piragapwadi, Tq.Ghansavangi, District Jalna.

6) Shaikh Bashir Shaikh Rasid, Age: 60 Yrs., occu. Driver, 7) Maimuna Shaikh Bashir Age: 55 Yrs., occ. Housewife, 8) Faimunabi Shaikh Ahmed, Age: 49 Yrs., occu. Housewife, 9) Shaikh Ahmed Shaikh Hussain, Age: 53 Yrs., occu.Service, All 6 to 9 R/o Baijipura, Aurangabad. = APPELLANTS (Orig.Accused Nos.1 to 9)

VERSUS The State of Maharashtra = RESPONDENT -----

Mr.Joydeep Chatterji,Advocate for Appellants;

Mr.AM Phule,APP for Respondent-State.

-----

CORAM : SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,J.

RESERVED ON : 12/10/2020 PRONOUNCED ON : 24 / 11/202 0 JUDGMENT:-

1. Present appeal has been filed by original accused persons, challenging their conviction in Sessions Case No.190/2011 by learned Assistant Sessions Judge-2, Aurangabad dated 25.1.2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 306, 452, 294, 323, 504, 506, read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. All the appellants are referred to by their nomenclature before trial Court for the sake of convenience.

2. A brief conspectus of the facts relevant to unfold the controversy is as under :

a) First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged by one Munifa Shaikh on 18.1.2011 with Paithan MIDC Police Station, wherein she contended that she resides with her husband and children at Balanagar, Tq. Paithan. Original Accused No.1 resides in the same vicinity and is distantly related to her. She contended that when she had gone to the forest area to pick up fire-wood around

2.00 pm on 13.1.2011 and returned at about 4.00 pm, she found original accused No.3 assaulting nephew of the informant, who is aged 13-14 years, by stick. Said nephew’s parents had gone for work, and therefore, the informant asked accused No.3 as to what has happened. At that time, she told that nephew of the informant has committed rape on daughter of accused No.3, who is aged two and half to three years. Accused No.3 started picking up quarrel with the informant. According to the informant, some other ladies were also present. In the evening, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the informant, i.e. parents of said nephew came. Accused No.3 had picked up quarrel with them also. Accused No.4 was present along with accused No.3 and she had also abused. Thereafter, there was no quarrel on 14.1.2011. However, at about 9.00 am on 15.1.2011, when husband of the informant went for work, so also her brother-in-law and sister-in-law went outside, the informant was at home; all the accused went inside the house of the informant and started assaulting her with fists and kick blows. They were asking her as to why she has intervened in the assault given by accused No.3 to her nephew.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 were standing outside the house and they were instigating the ladies that they should drag the informant out of the house. Accused Nos.6 and 9 were in the first room of the informant's house and were instigating the lady members to assault the informant. Accused No.9, who is serving in police department, was uttering that he would rape the informant. The ornaments on person of the informant as well as from person of her daughter as well as cash amount was thrown. Accused Nos.6 and 9 were also saying that kerosene should be brought and her house should be put to fire. Accused No.1 gave a phone call to mobile of informant’s brother-in-law, viz. Tayyab, and he was calling him to return back to home. He was abusing. House of brother-in-law of the informant was closed and latched by the accused persons. When people started gathering, accused persons went home. The informant further states that a