Bombay High Court
Raman Aasu Gavit And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 29 November, 2019
Author: K.K.Sonawane
Bench: K.K.Sonawane
{1} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
908 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3168 OF 2019
IN APPEAL/956/2019
. Suman Aasu Gavit ..Applicant
(Orig. accused No.1)
Versus
. The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents
...
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3169 OF 2019
IN APPEAL/956/2019
1. Raman Aasu Gavit
2. Dhana Rubaji Gavit ..Applicants
(Orig. accused Nos.2 & 3)
Versus
. The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr.A.S.Barlota h/f. Mrs.Sabahat T. Kazi
APP for Respondent : Mr.A.A.Jagatkar
...
CORAM : K.K.SONAWANE, J.
DATE: 29th November, 2019 PER COURT:-
1. Learned counsel for the applicants seeks leave to delete name of respondent No.2 from the array of respondents.
2. Leave granted at the risk of applicants. Amendment be carried out forthwith.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants - convicts and learned APP appearing for respondent - State of Maharashtra.
4. Applicants preferred present applications seeking suspension of substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed upon them and to ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 ::: {2} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
enlarge them on bail pending the appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants did not commit any crime as alleged under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). They are falsely implicated in this case. He contends that in all, eight witnesses were examined on behalf of prosecution to bring home the guilt of the accused. The evidence of prosecution witnesses recorded is not sufcient to prove ofence under Section 307 of IPC. Learned counsel submitted that the learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence on record in its proper perspective and committed error by convicting the applicants for the ofence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. According to learned counsel, the applicants-appellants have every hope of success in appeal. The applicants are sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fne of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to sufer simple imprisonment for six months each for ofence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. The learned trial Court also imposed conviction under Section 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced the applicants to sufer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fne of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to sufer simple imprisonment for three months each. It has been directed that all the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. The learned counsel for the applicants urged that in case substantive sentence of imprisonment is not suspended, the very purpose of fling the appeal would be frustrated.
6. Learned APP for the respondent raised objections and submits ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 ::: {3} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
that learned trial Court has appreciated entire evidence on record in proper manner. PW-5-complainant and PW-6 Police Constable - Dilip Fulsing Chaure stated about overt act of the applicants and their attempt to kill PW-5 complainant - Tahsildar by driving the vehicle on his person. According to learned APP, there is no error or infrmity in the fndings of conviction of applicants for the ofence under Sections 307 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. Therefore, substantive sentence imposed on the applicants awarded by the learned trial Court would not be suspended. He added that such type of incidents are increasing day-by-day, and therefore, both the applications are required to be dismissed.
7. Having given anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on behalf of both sides, it appears that there are two incidents occurred at the relevant time, as narrated by the witnesses in this case. It has been alleged that after completion of procedural formalities of illegal excavation of sand by the concerned persons, the PW-5-Tahsildar started proceeding towards his Headquarters at Navapur, District Nandurbar. But, in the meanwhile, when his Government vehicle reached near the vicinity of village Teen-Tembha road, the applicants-accused arrived in front of his vehicle in their silver colour Maruti Swift Car. The appellants-accused accosted the vehicle of PW-5 Tahsildar and started giving threats of dire consequences to him. When PW-5 Tahsildar was standing on the road, at that time the applicants occupied the seats in their Maruti Swift Car and attempted to drive the vehicle on the person of PW-5-Tahsildar. But, he succeeded to dodge the attempt and immediately went aside ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 ::: {4} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
the road. Thereafter, applicants vanished from the spot in their vehicle. It has also alleged that after sometime, the applicants again came from backside in their vehicle and after overtaking the vehicle of Tahsildar, they went away. The PW-5 Tahsildar visited to Navapur Police Station and lodged the First Information Report (FIR) about the alleged incident. Pursuant to FIR, Police of Navapur Police Station registered ofence under Sections 307, 353 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and set the penal law in motion. The prosecution examined in all eight witnesses to prove guilt of the accused. The learned trial Court, after considering the statements of the applicants recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, held all the applicants guilty for the ofence punishable under Sections 307 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and imposed the substantive sentence of imprisonment and fne as indicated above.
8. Being dissatisfed with the fndings of conviction, the applicants preferred the appeal to redress their grievance. Pending the appeal, applicants moved the present applications seeking suspension of substantive sentence of imprisonment and to admit them on bail. The scrutiny of the oral and circumstantial evidence adduced on record prima-facie reveals that the applicants ventured to intercept the vehicle of PW-5 Tahsildar while he was enroute to his Headquarters at Navapur. It has also alleged that the applicants had given threats of dire consequence to PW-5 Tahsildar for his action against the vehicle of applicants for illegal excavation of sand. The PW-5 Tahsildar divulged about the overt act of the applicants that they gave threats of life to him as well as they attempted to kill him by driving vehicle Maruti ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 ::: {5} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
Swift Car on his person. In order to corroborate the testimony of PW-5 Tahsildar, the prosecution relied on evidence of PW-6 Police Constable, who was accompanied with PW-5 Tahasildar at the relevant time. He has also narrated the similar incident of attempt to drive the vehicle on the person of Tahasildar and endeavour to crush him under the wheels of vehicle. The prosecution examined PW-1 Kailas Bhatu Gavate - Government personnel, who was accompanied with PW-5 at the time of occurrence of incident. But he did not disclose about the attempt of applicants to kill the Tahsildar by driving the vehicle on his person. It was an admitted fact that after alleged incident of attempt to kill the PW-5 - Tahasildar by giving dash of vehicle to him, the PW-5 complainant started proceeding towards Headquarters Navapur, at that time once again the vehicle of the applicants came from backside and by overtaking the vehicle of the Tahsildar, went away.
9. The attending circumstances referred above, prima-facie indicate that there was an attempt to intercept vehicle of PW-5 complainant by the applicants. They had also given threats of dire consequence. But, prima-facie, it would hard to believe that the applicants had an malafdes to kill PW-5 Tahsildar and therefore the applicants made attempt to give dash of their vehicle to PW-5 Tahsildar with an ill intention to crush him under the wheels of the vehicle. Had there been any intention to kill the Government personnel, the applicants/appellants had an ample opportunity to execute their task. They had an opportunity while overtaking the vehicle of PW-5 Tahsildar on second occasion. Albeit, the circumstances, prima-facie, do not adumbrates that the applicants had an intention to kill PW-5 Tahsildar. ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 :::
{6} APPLN.3168 OF 2019 & ANR.
10. Be that as it may, all these factual score is required to be dealt with in detail on the anvil of merits. But, at this initial stage, these circumstances found not sufcient to refrain this Court from exercising the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicants, pending the appeal. It is also worth to mention that the applicants were on bail pending trial. There were no any allegation of misuse of liberty against the applicants. They have also deposited requisite fne amount before learned trial Court. In such circumstances, in case, the short term sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicants is allowed to run pending the appeal, the very purpose of fling the present appeal would become infructuous one in all purpose for appellants. Therefore, there is no impediment to allow the applications.
11. Accordingly, both the applications stand allowed in terms of prayer clause-'B'. The substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicants by learned Sessions Judge, Nandurbar in Sessions Case No.13 of 2016 is hereby suspended pending the appeal. Meanwhile, the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety in like amount each. Bail before the learned trial Court. Accordingly, both the applications stand disposed of in above terms.
( K.K.SONAWANE ) JUDGE SPT ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2019 22:54:14 :::