Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahiman Patel And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra

1. Seventeen accused persons were charged and tried for offences under Sections 147, 148, 302/149, 302 read with Section 34, 307/149, 326/149 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code [`IPC' for short] and by judgment rendered by the Trial Court they were acquitted of all the charges. Against the order of acquittal an appeal was preferred by the State of Maharashtra before the High Court during the pendency of which Abbas Yunus Sonde [A-8] and Ibrahim alias Abdul Rahman Mohammad Kasim Patel [A-9] died, as such, appeal against them abated. The order of acquittal has been confirmed by the High Court in relation to seven accused persons viz., Qasim Hasanmiya Bedekar [A-7], Iqbal Abbas Sonde [A-12], Sharfuddin Abdul Rahiman Patel [A-13], Usman Hasanmiya Bedekar [A-14], Hasanmiya Dhondumiya Bedekar [A-15], Hajirabai w/o Daud Patel [A-16] and Julekhabi w/o Liyakat Sonde [A-17]. So far as, Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahiman Patel [A-5], Siraj Abbas Sonde [A-6] and Idrus Yunus Patel [A-11] are concerned, their acquittal has been confirmed in relation to the charge under Section 302 IPC but they have been convicted under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. They have been further convicted under Section 324/149 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. So far as Abdul Latif Hasanmiya Bedekar [A-1], Liyakat Abbas Sonde [A-2], Shaikhali Kasam Karjikar [A-3], Usman Abdul Rahiman Patel [A-4] and Daud Abdul Rahiman Patel [A-10] are concerned, they have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. These accused persons have been also convicted under Sections 148 and 324/149 IPC but, no separate sentence has been awarded.

2. Prosecution case, in short, was that one Mariam, daughter of Usman Hasanmiya [PW 19] had love affair with Qasim Hasanmiya Bedekar [A-7]. On 06.08.1982 Mariam disappeared from the village along with A-7. They proceeded to Bombay and got married on 15.08.1982. They returned to village Halbudruk six days before the incident. There was tension between the two groups in the village, i.e., Bedekars (accused persons) and Jalgaonkars (the members of prosecution party) on account of their said love affair but the matter was settled.

3. Further prosecution case was that on 27.8.1982 Salma Usman Dhanse [PW-12] had spread rice on the road in front of her house for drying. She had asked her daughter Parvin to sit and watch the same. Parvin, however, went out for playing which annoyed Salma and she scolded Parvin. Parvin sulked and sat in the sun. Salma told her that like the rice she would also get dried up which would be good for her as her fat would melt in that way. Hajirabai [A-16], who was living in the vicinity, thought that Salma had made those remarks against her, as such she picked up a quarrel with Salma. On 28.8.1982 when Usman Abdul Rahiman Dhanse [PW-3], husband of Salma, was coming to his house, A-16 accosted him and conveyed her grievance against Salma. PW-3 explained to her that those remarks were directed towards Parvin and not her. As A-16 was not satisfied with the explanation, A-4, A-5, A-12 and A-13 came to the house of PW-12 and abused her and her husband [PW-3]. When Nijam Malang Mukadam [PW-4], brother of PW-12, enquired as to why they were quarrelling, the four accused persons also abused and threatened him. PW-3 and PW-4 went to Ismail (since deceased) for advice as he was an elderly person in the village. Some other prosecution witnesses were also sitting in the house of Ismail who advised PW-3 and PW-4 not to quarrel but to lodge a complaint with the police. Upon their request Ismail accompanied them to the police station and all the three went on cycles. On their way to the police station they took Hussain Karjikar, brother-in-law of PW-4, along with them. Hussain advised PW-3 and PW-4 to go to Khalapur Police Station and lodge a complaint. Hussain and Ismail waited on the road. PW-3 and PW-4 reached the police station and lodged a First Information Report ['FIR' for short] against A-4, A-5, A-12 and A-13 on the statement of PW-3. In view of the said case, Head Constable-S.D. Pawar [PW-37], in-charge of the police station, sent JamadarPasthe by jeep to village Hal Budruk to bring the accused persons to the police station. A-4, A-5, A-12 and A-13 were brought to the police station by police jeep. The other accused persons, i.e., A-1, A-3, A-6, A-9 and A-11 also arrived at the police station. The police warned the accused persons not to commit breach of peace. A-9, who was also police Patel of the village, promised to bring both the parties to the police station at 7 a.m. next day. The Police obtained a written undertaking from the parties to the above effect.

4. According to the prosecution, accused persons left the police station by auto rickshaw whereas PW-3 and PW-4 on their cycles in the midnight of 28-29.8.1982 and on their way they took Ismail with them. By about 12:00 or 12:30 of the same midnight, the relatives of Ismail became concerned because he did not return to the village. Therefore, Badruddin Pechker, Ibrahim and Yunus Jalgaonkar and others decided to go and search for him. They reached hotel Delhi Durbar and decided to have tea and wait there for Ismail. PW-3 and PW-4 along with Ismail reached hotel Delhi Durbar where Badruddin and all others were waiting. All of them had tea in the hotel and left for the village between 2:00 to 2:30 in the midnight. PW-4 was ahead of others, since he had to go to Bombay for purchasing fish in connection with his business. Ismail was following him. Usman Yunus and Badruddin lagged behind for smoking. All the accused persons armed with swords, iron bars and sticks were waiting near a well for the return of the Jalgaonkars, i.e., the members of prosecution party. A-1 to A-5, A-8 and A-10 were armed with swords. When PW-4 arrived near the tamarind tree, the accused persons stopped and blamed him for going to the police station and lodging a case. The accused persons thereafter became abusive and started hurling harsh words against him. PW-4 was on his cycle. A-1 tried to hit PW-4 in his stomach with the sword he was holding. PW-4 avoided the blow but was hit on the left side of the abdomen. At this stage Ismail was seen coming behind him. Therefore, the accused persons turned towards Ismail. In the meanwhile, PW-4 escaped and reached the house of Ismail, called Abdul Qadir, son of Ismail, and told him that Ismail was being beaten up by the accused persons. Another son of Ismail, Shaikh Mohammad, also heard PW-4 saying so. Ismail came to be attacked near the tamarind tree. A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-10 dealt sword blows on the head of Ismail. PW-4, while going to his house, met PW-12 on the way who in turn enquired about her husband [PW-3] as he had not returned along with him. Having learnt about the incident from PW-4, she started towards the place of occurrence. Likewise, PW-2 as well as Yusuf proceeded towards the place of occurrence. While Ismail was being hit, Suleman reached near him and tried to save him from the accused persons. A- 1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-10 struck Suleman with their swords over his head. Some other accused also joined them. The prosecution witnesses, who tried to intervene, were also assaulted. By this time Yusuf also reached there who was also attacked by A-2, A-3, A-5 and A-10 as a result of which he fell down. In the meantime PW-12 also reached there and was also assaulted by some of the accused. When this was going on, PW-2 thought of reporting the matter to the police and accordingly, he came to the Bombay-Pune road, boarded a taxi, reached Khalapur Police Station and informed the Station In-charge, Shivaji Dhondu Pawar [PW-37] at 2:45 in the night that A-1 was moving with a sword in the village and was indulging in massacre and there was great commotion in the village. Sub-Inspector, Madhav Bajirao Malve [PW-39], who was present in the police station, left for the place of occurrence where statement of PW-2 was recorded at 3:15 in the midnight, on the basis of which an FIR was drawn up at the police station on 29.08.1982.

6. Defence of the accused persons was that they were innocent, had no complicity with the crime and no occurrence much less the occurrence alleged had taken place. According to the accused persons, some of them and members of prosecution party had received injuries in some other manner of occurrence at some other place, but they were falsely implicated in the case on hand.

7. During trial the prosecution examined several witnesses and on conclusion of the same, Trial Court acquitted all the accused persons but on appeal being preferred High Court partly reversed the order of acquittal and convicted eight accused persons as stated above. Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2001 has been filed by A-5, A-6 and A-11 and Criminal Appeal No. 504 of 2000 by A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-10, whereas, Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2001 has been filed by the informant in which leave has been granted in relation to that portion of judgment of the High Court whereby it has confirmed acquittal of A-5, A-6 and A-11 in relation to the charge under Section 302 IPC.

24. In the result, Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2001 is allowed in part and while maintaining convictions of appellants of this appeal, the sentences of imprisonment awarded against A-11 are reduced to the period already undergone. A-11, who is on bail, is discharged from the liability of bail bonds. Criminal Appeal No. 504 of 2000 is dismissed, bail bonds of appellants of this appeal, who are on bail, are cancelled and they are directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence. Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2001 is dismissed.