RAMESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants in Crl.A. No.100014/2014 are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2, In Crl. A. No.100009/2014 the appellants are arrayed as accused Nos.3 and 4 in S.C. No.21/2013 on the file of District and Sessions Judge, Koppal. The Trial Court has convicted the accused persons and sentenced accused Nos.1 and 2 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ - each within 15 days, accused Nos.3 and 4 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 411 of I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ - each within 15 day. A common judgment is rendered to convict the accused Nos.1 to 4 as noted above.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellants in both the appeals and the learned State Public Prosecutor for State.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants strenuously contends that except the evidence of the Investigation Officer there is absolutely no evidence available to connect the accused Nos.1 to 4 in order to record a judgment of conviction and pass any sentence against them. Particularly, the learned Counsel for the accused Nos.3 and 4 specifically contended, there is no sort of evidence even from the mouth of the Investigating Officer in order to attract Section 411 of I.P.C. to convict the accused Nos.3 and 4.