Mumbai: The Thane Sessions court while convicting a 26 year old man who was held guilty under the charges of Robbery held that the crime of ‘Robbery’ causes a serious threat to the Law-and-Order situation of the society.
The court thus while deciding on the quantum of punishment, which is to be awarded to the accused, maintained that the accused deserves a stern punishment towards his act. The court, thus have awarded Sagar Gaikwad with a maximum punishment of one year and four months along with a fine of Rs 2000.
“While awarding the sentence, it is necessary to see the facts and circumstances of the case. Minimum punishment cannot be granted to the accused as offences like robbery cause serious threat to the law-and-order situation in the society. The accused had complete knowledge of the offence being committed by him but he still proceeded towards its commission. Hence, a stern punishment needs to be awarded to the accused to make him realise the seriousness of the offence committed by him. At the same time, regard needs to be had to the age and poverty of the accused. After thoughtful consideration of the points put up by the prosecution, and the accused on the point of sentence, it appears appropriate to convict the accused to a simple imprisonment of 1 year, 4 months and 7 days. Further, considering his financial capacity, it appears appropriate to award fine of Rs. 2000 upon the accused,” reads the court’s order copy.
As per the order copy, the Pradip Kamble (39 ), victim on September 20,2023, while he was on his way to office at 7 in the morning, accused Sagar came near him and attempted to snatch the victim’s mobile phone. When resisted by the victims, he was assaulted by the accused and later, he snatched his phone and ran away. The complainant approached the police stating and lodged an FIR against the accused at the Shreenagar police station.
The police was successful in arresting the accused on the same day and later remanded to the magisterial custody. However the accused then had expressed his willingness to plead guilty to the offence. “Accused was also informed about the maximum sentence that could be awarded if he pleads guilty. He still volunteered to plead guilty. Hence, it can be concluded that accused has admitted his guilt voluntarily after understanding the charges levelled against him and therefore, he is liable to be convicted,” held the court.
The accused had however pleaded the court for imposition of minimum imprisonment on the ground that the accused is poor.” He has been in jail since many days. The accused also undertook to reform himself and restrain from committing such offences in future,” the accused had pleaded the court. The prosecution however had prayed for the maximum punishment.
