Bombay High Court
APEAL/201/2002 of MOHD.PARVEZ MOHD.JAFFAR SODA and ORS. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on 22 December 2006
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINALCRIMINALCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.544 OF 2001 Gulab Jethanand Khemnani. ..Appellant. V/s. The State
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.544 OF 2001
Gulab Jethanand Khemnani.
..Appellant...Respondent.
V/s.The State of Maharashtra.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.201 OF 2002Mohd. Parvez Mohd. Jaffar Soda Mohd. Parvez Mohd. Jaffar Soda..Appellant.V/s.The State of Maharashtra...Respondent.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.516 OF 2001
Ashok Durgashankar Awasti.
..Appellant.
V/s.The State of Maharashtra...Respondent Mr.Naveen Chomal for appellant in Appeal No.544 of2001(org.accused No.5)
Mr.U.S.Vanjara for appellant in Cr.Appeal No.201 of2002(org.accused No.1)
Mr.Amit Sale i/b. M.L.Patil for appellant inCr.Appeal No.516 of 2001(org.accused No.4).
Dr.S.S.Tatkare, APP for State in all the matters.
CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J
DATE : DECEMBER 22, 2006.
P.C. :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. For the reasons separately recorded in theJudgment pronounced in open court, following operativeorder is passed.
.Accordingly, appeals preferred by theaccused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 would succeed inpart. In that, finding of guilt recorded bythe trial Court against each of these accusedfor offences punishable under Sections 120-Bof I.P.Code r/w 3(2) r/w 2(1)(a) ofM.C.O.C.Act is upheld. Similarly, finding ofguilt in respect of offences punishable undersections 489B and 489C r/w 120-B of I.P.Codeis also upheld. However, in so far as orderof sentence imposed by the trial Court for thesaid offences, the same would stand altered inthe following terms.
(i) In relation to the offencespunishable under section 120-B ofI.P.Code r/w section 3(2), r/w 2(1)(a)of M.C.O.C.Act, each of the accusedNos.1, 4 and 5 are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for the periodalready undergone by them and pay finein the sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs payable byeach of them, in default to sufferfurther rigorous imprisonment for oneyear.
(ii) In so faras offencespunishable under sections 489B and489(C) r/w 120-B of I.P.Code, each ofthe accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 aresentenced to suffer rigorousimprisonment for five years, whichperiod is already undergone by them.They are further ordered to pay fineof Rs.5,000/- payable by each of them,in default to suffer rigorousimprisonment for six months, ifalready not undergone.
(iii) The substantive sentences ofimprisonment to run concurrently witheach other, except the sentenceimposed in default of payment of fine.
(iv) Accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 be
released subject to above and if notrequired in any other offence.
(v) Muddemal in relation to theaccused Nos.1,4 and 5 be disposed ofin terms of the directions given bythe trial Court.
.All concerned to act on the copy of theoperative order passed by this court to be issued dulyauthenticated by the office.