SYAM SUNDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18th February, 2008 of the Trial Court, whereby appellant no.1 has been convicted under Section 392 IPC read with Section 397 IPC; sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Appellant nos. 2 and 3 have been convicted under Section 392 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of '5,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

(2.) IT is this judgment which is under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) I have carefully perused the statements of PW3 and PW4 and find them to be trustworthy and reliable witnesses. From their testimony it is proved beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt that incident did happen in which appellants had robbed the complainant. No material discrepancy could be pointed out by the learned counsel, in their statements so as to discard their version with regard to the incident of robbery. In my view, offence under Section 392 IPC is made out against all the appellants and they had been rightly convicted by the Trial Court under this provision of law.