13 May 2008
Supreme Court
Download

RAMJI JIRANGA PAWAR Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Case number: Crl.A. No.-000877-000877 / 2008
Diary number: 24586 / 2007
Advocates: NARESH KUMAR Vs


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

                    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.877 OF 2008             [ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NO.6416 OF 2007]

RAMJI JIRANGA PAWAR & ORS.                      Appellants

              VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                          Respondent

                                    ORDER

1.        Leave granted.

2.        In this appeal the trail Court by its judgment dated 30.3.2005 convicted

appellant No.1 (Ramji Jiranga Pawar) for the offence punishable under Section 324

of the Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC") and sentenced him to suffer rigorous

imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine

to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.      The trial court also convicted

appellant No.2 (Parbatsingh Jiranga Pawar) and appellant No.3 (Dwarka Bhusalya

Pawar) for the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and sentenced them to

suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of

payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

3.        On appeal, the High Court by its judgment dated 11th April, 2007

confirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants by the trial court.

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

4.        Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having carefully

gone through the evidence placed on record, in our view, the ends of justice will be

sub-served if the sentence awarded to appellant No.1 is reduced from 3 years R.I. to

1= years R.I. and the sentence of appellant Nos. 2 & 3, who are stated to have

already undergone almost 7 months R.I., is reduced to the period already undergone

by them. We order accordingly. Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 shall be released forthwith,

if not required in any other case.

5.        The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

                                                  .....................J.                                                    (P.P. Naolekar)

                                                  .....................J.                                                    (V.S. Sirpurkar) New Delhi; May 13, 2008.