MOHD. TARA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MOHD . Tara (the appellant) impugns the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 14.11.2011 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 34/10 arising out of FIR No. 28/08 PS Chandni Chowk by which he was convicted for committing offence under Section 392/34 IPC. By an order on sentence dated 29.11.2011, he was awarded RI for five years with fine Rs. 20,000/ -.

(2.) ALLEGATIONS against the appellant were that on or before 18.02.2008, he along with his associates Mohd.Yasin, Mohd. Mustafa, Noor Mohd., Ajay @ Shahid, Munni and Ahad (PO) conspired to commit dacoity at the house of Smt. Khatoon Begum, r/o 5371, Koocha Rehman, gali Anarwali, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Pursuant to that conspiracy on 18.02.2008 at about 06.40 P.M., they robbed her Rs. 10 lacs, mobile phone make Nokia and other jewellery articles in the said dacoity. The police machinery was set in motion when Daily Diary (DD) No. 26 (Ex.PW -2/A) was recorded at Police Post Ballimaran about the dacoity. SI Jagdish Yadav along with Insp. I.K.Jha went to the spot. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report after recording Khatoon Begum's statement (Ex.PW -6/A). During the course of investigation, the accused persons including the appellant were apprehended. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was submitted against all of them; they were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined nineteen witnesses to prove their guilt. In 313 statements, the accused persons denied their complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and appreciating the evidence, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment, convicted the appellant along with his associates under Section 392/34 IPC and was acquitted of all other charges. It is apt to note that State did not challenge the judgment.

(3.) SINCE the appellant has given up challenge to the findings of the Trial Court on conviction under Section 392/34 IPC in view of overwhelming evidence whereby he was identified by the complainant in her Court statement, his conviction under Section 392/34 IPC is affirmed. Nominal roll dated 14.10.2013 reveals that he has suffered custody in this case for four years besides earning remission for six months and twenty nine days as on 10.10.2013. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has stated that the unexpired portion is about one month at present. The jail conduct of the appellant is satisfactory. Since the appellant has already served almost the complete substantive sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court, the period already undergone by him in this case is taken as substantive sentence. The default sentence for non -payment of fine Rs. 20,000/ - is further reduced to one month instead of six months.