MANOJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE the present appeal, the appellant seeks setting aside of the judgment dated 26.11.2002 and order on sentence dated 30.11.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in case bearing FIR No. 166/1997 registered at Police Station Alipur, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 395/412 IPC.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 27.05.1997 after finishing the work, Sunil Kumar, who was working as Supervisor in M/s. Kaushik Metal Works, situated at Hamirpur Road, Bakoli, Delhi, slept in the office of the said factory and other labourers, namely Gauri Shankar Goswami and Udai Chand Dass slept in the lawn and Kartik Kundu and his wife were sleeping near the main gate of the said factory. Around 1.30 AM, Kartik gave calls to Sunil Kumar, resultantly he woke up and saw that one person was peeping through the window of the office. The said person had put his hand inside through the window, lifted the receiver of the telephone, broken it and threatened Sunil Kumar to open the door otherwise he would fire at him. Out of fear, Sunil Kumar opened the door. Two -three persons armed with country made pistols and knives came inside and caught hold of him and demanded keys of the main gate, however, he denied that keys were not with him. Thereafter, one of them sat alongwith Sunil Kumar in the office and others went to the main gate and had broken open the same with the help of iron rods etc. At the point of revolver, three -four persons threatened the labourers named above, took them inside and bolted them from outside. Thereafter, one TATA 407 Tempo was brought inside the factory premises and 240 lead slabs weighing 20 kilogram each were loaded by the outlaws in the said vehicle and thereafter they fled away. Sunil Kumar informed the police about the incident and also gave description of the accused persons. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested and the said lead slabs were recovered. Accordingly, chargesheet was filed. Charge for offences punishable under Section 395 IPC was framed against accused Kulwant, Ramu, Iqbal, Manoj (appellant herein), Sanjay, Balbir Singh, Balak Ram and Shiv Charan and charge for offence punishable under Section 412 IPC was framed against accused Ravinder and Jai Parkash, to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined eleven witnesses in all including the eye witness, namely, Sunil Kumar (PW5).

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant at the outset submits that he does not want to press the appeal on merits but prays that the appellant be released on the sentence of imprisonment which he had already undergone. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, I do not deem it necessary to deal with other aspects of this case.