VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 8th of March, 1995 passed in Session Trial No. 186/92 by the First Additional Session Judge, Durg. By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted u/s 395 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years. In all 7 accused persons (A-1 to A-7) were prosecuted for the offences punishable u/ss 395 & 397 IPC. Out of them, accused-Manbahadur (A-5) has been acquitted, whereas, the above 6 appellants/accused persons have been convicted.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:--

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants argued that complainant-Nakchhed Sharma and Pardeshi were not examined; Nakchhed Sharma was the witness who allegedly identified the accused persons vide T.I.Ps. conducted on 21.2.92 and 6.3.92; the Session Judge has wrongly based the conviction on the evidence of conducting the T.I.Ps. by Executive Magistrates; the above evidence was not substantive evidence; in absence of dock-identification nothing was possible on the evidence of T.I.Ps. said to be conducted by 2 Executive Magistrates; memorandum (Ex.-P/4), leading to discoveries of various articles, was also not proved; and Satrughan Sinha (PW-4) could not identify the assailants on dock; therefore, the conviction was not possible.