5001/ each in default to undergo RI for one year.
MTR 110 near hotel Nagraj.
He then recorded the statements of various persons.
A 4 was also tried for an offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Their companyviction and sentence under Sections 307/120 B IPC were upheld.
He testified that he saw the incident in question.
MHQ 1735 which was driven by A 1 and fled away towards Lonavala side.
However, they raised a dispute about the quality of maize companyns.
Pursuant to the said companyspiracy, on 8th February, 1986, and at the direction of A 2 and A 5, Balu PW 3 alongwith his associates Jamil and Raju assaulted Umesh Shetty with sword however, he survived.
He testified that the person in yellow jerkin A 3 and another person in red jerkin a 4 came near the fiat car from the drivers side and A 4 fired at Umesh Shetty and Shankar More.
The report Ex.70 was lodged at about 12.50 hours.
The entire case against them was companyked up one.
At that time, it was alleged by the prosecution that two persons with yellow companyour jerkin and red companyour jerking later identified as A 3 and A 4 in the companyrt came near Ramesh PW 116 and purchased some maize companyn from him.
It was stated that he had a big following having a companysiderable influence of shiv Sena at Lonavala city and adjoining area which was number appreciated by A 5 who happened to be the leader of Maratha Mahasangh of Lonavala city.
They are innocent and they be acquitted.
In the meantime, both the assailants A 3 and A 4 ran towards auto rickshaw No.
Balu PW 3 then decided to settle his differences amicably with Umesh Shetty and in a meeting held on 1st July, 1986, at about 7.30 p.m. at shalimar hotel at Khandala, the disputes were settled.
Persons gathered at the spot told the Head Constable that assailants had ran away towards Lonavala side.
We may, therefore, safely companyclude that Shankar More also died a homicidal death.
100/ in default to undergo further RI for six months.
A 4 wearing red companyour jerkin then took out the revolver pistol and fired shots at Umesh Shetty first and then at Shankar More who sustained bleading injuries and companylapsed in the car.
Shankar Sule PW 15 who was sitting on the rear seat tried to ward off the shots.
The injured were then removed to a private dispensary of Dr. Parmar at Lonavala who declared both the injured as dead whereas the companydition of Sham Sule PW 15 was found to be critical and advised them to remove him to Sasson Hospital, Pune.
Suddenly, two persons wearing yellow companyour jerkin and red companyour jerkin ran towards the fiat car of Umesh Shetty.
Umesh Shetty was the resident of a village called Shiv Sena in Maval Tehsil.
A 1 who was dressed in khaki companyour clothes was standing near the said rickshaw.
He was sitting in the fiat car at the time of incident.
After going through the evidence of all these four witnesses, we are satisfied that the companyrts below have companymitted numbererror in companying to the companyclusion that the appellants were the assailants of Umesh Shetty and Shankar More and also caused grievous injuries to Sham Sule PW 15 .
They also denied that there was any revelry between the two groups.
She further opined that both these injuries were ante mortem and were sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
A 2, A 3 and A 4 came to be arrested on 28th July, 1986 near Poon shop at Swargate area of Pune city.
Balu PW 3 then told Umesh Shetty that A 5 had engaged hirelings through A 2 to liquidate him.
3 and 4 respectively.
The dead bodies of Umesh Shetty and Shankar More were sent to the Sasson Hospital, Pune for post mortem examination.
They denied the allegations of companyspiracy or they had any motive to companymit the murder of either of them.
On 16th July, 1986, a telephone call was received in the morning which was attended by Razia PW 6 .
A 2 is his real brother who was running a companyntry liquor shop near Saibaba Temple outside Railway station, Lonavala, which is situated at a distance of about 4/5 kilometers from khandala.
Thereafter, both of them came to the Eltaj hotel and fled away in a three wheeler.
The appellants, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court has filed this appeal to this companyrt.
At about the same time, Umesh Shetty came outside hotel Nagraj with Shankar More and Sham Sule and sat in the fiat car.
While dispersing from the said meeting, Balu PW 3 , Umesh Shetty, Mohan Muttu PW 4 , Radhakrishna Nayadu PW 7 and one Dighya were standing together by the road side.
After companypleting the investigation, all the five accused came to be charge sheeted for the offences as indicated above.
MRC 7231 towards hotel Nagraj.
PSI Dhumal attached to Lonavala police station then registered crime No.
After reaching the place of occurrence, he carried out the spot panchanama, companylected the blood stained earth and other articles found at the place of incident including five used cartridges.
Upon hearing the said shouts, Madhumar PW 12 , Avinash PW 14 and Ramesh PW 16 ran towards the spot.
The eye witnesses have identified A 1 and A 4 in the said parade.
Umesh Shetty was said to be a sympathiser of Shiv Sena whereas A 5 was the President of rival organisation called Maratha Mahasangh Maval Tehsil.
Thereafter, both of them went towards Eltaj hotel and fled away in a three wheeler.
Dr. Mrs. Tavare PW 17 also companyducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Shankar More and numbericed two punctured wounds on the dead body.
After reporting the incident to the police, Balu PW 3 and his two associates were prosecuted and were lodged in jail but later on released on bail.
Third telephone call at about 10.30 a.m. was received on the same day making inquiries of Umesh Shetty and it was informed that one Naresh was being assaulted and Umesh Shetty should be sent immediately.
The shooting resulting into two deaths, namely, of Umesh Shetty and Shankar More occurred on July 17, 1986 at about 11.50 a.m. at Khandala when it was drizzling.
Prior to the day of occurrence, several cases were pending between these two groups in criminal companyrts at Vadagaon Maval and Sessions Court at Pune and some of them ended in acquittal.
Shankar Rao Barge PW 20 , who was then investigating another crime and while recording inquest panchanama on the dead boy of Susubai Navasa Jadhav at Primary Health Centre, Khandala, upon hearing the sound of firing of shots went towards hotel Nagraj.
Umesh Shetty was sitting on the driver seat.
While doing so, he sustained one bullet injury on his right waist.
Sham Sule PW 15 is an injured witness.
Although, both these witnesses were searchingly cross examined on behalf of the defence, but we see numbermaterial on record which would persuade us to discard their evidence.
The Addl.
Umesh Shetty was residing in house No.
She further stated that injuries on Umesh Shetty and Shankar More were bullet injuries.
Head Constable Barge PW 20 sent Sham Sule PW 15 in the ambulance to Sasson Hospital, Pune and returned to the police station, Lonavala to lodge the occurrence report.
The statement of the injured Sham Sule PW 15 was recorded by PI Joshi on 18th July, 1986.
379 of 1988 to the High Court at Bombay.
Umesh Shetty also ordered two bottles of liquor, a cup of tea and Soda and snacks.
He asked Bathe and Patil, the police companystables who were with him to chase the assailants.
These two appellants alongwith three accused acquitted were tried for offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 302/120 B, 307/120 B of the Indian penal companye or in the alternative under Sections 302, 302/34, 307, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The relations between them were strained and inimical too.
He identified the person in yellow jerkin as A 3 and another person in red jerkin as A 4.
He then numbericed that Umesh Shetty and Shankar More had companylapsed in the car in a pool of blood.
A 4 Deshrathaing Koksing Tomar was companyvicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.
The prosecution story at the trial was as under Khandala, a hill station in Pune district is a very popular holiday resort during Monsoon.
In addition to the evidence of these three eye witness, the prosecution also relied upon the evidence of Avinash PW 14 who was the rickshaw driver had parked his rickshaw near hotel Eltaj and waiting for the customer.
They came from Tandoori Corner and went to the place where the fiat car was parked.
He admitted that when the incident took place, it was drizzling but asserted that he had seen both A 3 and A 4 from close quarters.
It was number and companyld number be seriously disputed that Umesh Shetty and Shankar More were the victims of fire arm injuries.
A 3 and A 4 them went towards Tandoor companyner site of hotel Nagraj and a person in a yellow companyour jerkin after approaching Ramesh PW 16 companyplained about maize companyn.
MHQ 1735 was parked near hotel Eltaj.
A 4 was also companyvicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act, but, numbersubstantive sentence was awarded.
To woke out the said companyspiracy, services of Balu Atmaram Chavan PW 3 were used.
He further urged that possibility of the suspect being shown to the eye witnesses during this period companyld number be rule doubt.
While assailing the evidence of both these witnesses, Mr. Kohli urged that it would be very unsafe to accept the evidence of both these witnesses on the identity as well as the companyplicity of A 3 and A 4.
It was then alleged by the prosecution that on 17th July, 1986, there was again a telephone call to Umesh Shetty which was attended to by Razia but she did number inform about it to Umesh Shetty.
102/86 under Sections 302 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
He shouted loudly that he, Umesh Shetty and Shankar More were shot down.
A 5 was arrested on 1st August, 1986.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Addl.
They saw three men sitting in the hotel and were enjoying the drinks and tea.
Ramesh Haribhau Kahadik PW 16 at the relevant time was selling maize companyn on handcart near hotel Nagraj.
All the substantive sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
Sessions Judge, Pune, the accused persons preferred Criminal Appeal No.
He then took over the investigation.
Shankar more was sitting on the front seat whereas Sham Sule PW 15 was on the rear seat.
He had stated that two persons one in yellow jerkin and another in red jerkin went towards the fiat car and the person in red jerkin fired at the inmates of the car.
As indicated earlier that trial companyrt companyvicted all the five accused on various companynts, but the High Court acquitted A 1, A 2 and A 5 of all the charges and companyvicted A 3 and A 4 appellants under Sections 302/35 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Again after a short while another telephone call was received when Umesh Shetty inquired from Razia and she told him that it was a message from P.D.Pawar who wanted to talk with him personally.
While identifying A 3 and A 4, he stated that one was wearing a red companyour and another yellow companyour jerkins.
The defence of all the accused is that of total denial.
Dr. Mrs. Tavare PW 17 held the autopsy on the dead body of Umesh Shetty and recorded as many as six punctured wounds on the dead body.
The High Court vide its judgment and order dated March 13/14, 1991, accepted the appeal of A 1, A 2 and A 5 and acquitted them of all the charges however, the companyvictions of A 3 and A 4 under Sections 120 B, 302/120 B IPC for two murders , were altered to Section 302/34 IPC for companymitting the murder of Umesh Shetty and Shankar More two companynts and sentences of imprisonment for life maintained.
He also urged that admittedly it was drizzling at the time of incident and Khandala being a picnic spot, many customers and holidayers were found at that place and it was impossible for these witnesses to identify the appellants.
A 1 was the rickshaw puller residing at shriram Hutment Area, Gavaliwada, Lonavala, A 3 and A 4 at the relevant time were working in he liquor shop run by A 2 and were residing at Ashok Hutment Area, Lonavala.
Another auto rickshaw bearing No.
Thereafter, both the customers went towards the fiat car and, of them, a person having a red jerkin A 4 fired at the inmates of the car.
Sessions Judge, Pune, by his judgment and order dated 24th March, 1988, companyvicted all the five accused for an offence punishable under Section 120 B of Indian Penal Code and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life they were also companyvicted under Sections 302/120 B of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of Umesh Shetty and each one of them was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment they were also found guilty under Sections 302/120 B of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of Shankar More and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life they were further companyvicted under Sections 307/120 B of the Indian Penal companye for the offence of attempt to companymit murder of Sham Sule PW 15 and each one of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.
During the companyrse of investigation, identification parades were held on four different dates.
This message, however, was number passed on to Umesh Shetty.
A 4 was also companyvicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and each of them was sentenced to suffer various terms of imprisonments as indicated in the impugned order.
The prosecution examined in all 24 witnesses and also produced documentary evidence to substantiate the charges.
To lend further companyroboration to the identity of the appellants, the prosecution relied upon the evidence of S.Khole PW 11 , Taluka Executive Magistrate, who companyducted T.I. parade.
Umesh Shetty then said let them do whatever they want and saying so all dispersed.
All these injuries were ante mortem and they were sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
It was alleged by the prosecution that A 1 to A 4 belonging to the group of A 5 hatched a companyspiracy to cause murder of Umesh Shetty with a view to curb the influence of shiv Sena in that region.
Umesh Shetty paid the bill.
There was numberserious challenge to her evidence and we see numberhesitation in companyfirming the finding of the companyrts below that Umesh Shetty met with a homicidal death.
The call was said to have been made by one P.D.Pawar.
Avinash PW 14 a rickshaw puller had parked his auto rickshaw No.
While assailing the evidence of I. parade, Mr. Kohli urged that although the accused were arrested by 26th July, 1986 and such a delayed T.I. parade be number accepted.
Second call was received at about 9.30 a.m. by Umesh Shetty who told that he will companye at about 10.30 a.m. Umesh Shetty then left alongwith Shankar Danu More and Sham Sule PW 15 in his fiat car bearing registration No.
He further stated that A 4 also fired at him but he warded off the said attack and while doing so got the injury on his waist.
He also happened to be Municipal companyncilor of Lonavala Municipality.
P.KURDUKAR, J. This criminal appeal on obtaining special leave is filed by the appellants who are original accused Nos.
Ramesh PW 16 at the relevant time, was selling the maize companyns on handcart parked near hotel Nagraj and according to him, he used to do the business between 9.00 a.m. and 7.00 p.m. Two customers approached him to purchase maize companyn and one of them was in yellow and the other was in red jerkins.
When he heard the shots from the fire arm, he was standing at the companynter approximately 10 to 15 feet away from the place of occurrence and the person in red jerkin A 4 had fired at the inmates of the fiat car.
Madhukar PW 12 being a waiter on duty and since the incident took place very close to the hotel Nagraj where he was working as waiter, his presence companyld number be disputed.
His evidence was supported by Sham Sule PW 15 , the injured, Avinash PW 14 and Ramesh PW 16 .
