VASIM AND JAFRU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two Appeals filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, are directed against the judgment dated 21.3.2011 passed in SC No. 312/2005 on the file of Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court -V at Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore. In other words, appellant Nos. 1 and 2 in Crl.A No. 363/2011 are accused Nos. 2 and 3 in SC No. 312/2005; whereas appellant in Crl.A No. 406/2011 is the accused No. 4 in SC No. 312/2005. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Appeals may be stated as under:

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants (accused Nos. 2 and 3) in Crl. Appeal No. 363/2011 submitted that the Police have foisted a false case against the accused though they were taken to their custody on the previous day of incident itself; there are no independent eye witnesses to the alleged incident and the trial Court erred in convicting the accused solely on the basis of evidence of Police witnesses. He further submitted that the trial Court erred in awarding harsh punishment of R I for 10 years for the alleged offences under Section 337/ 307 of IPC.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State submits that on proper appreciation of evidence on record, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offences alleged against them and awarded adequate sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 333, 353 and 307 r/w. Section 34 of IPC, and there is no good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. He further submits that when the appellant/accused No. 4 in Crl.A. No. 406/2011 was released on bail, he has committed crimes and there is no good ground made out for modifying the sentence.