NOOR @ NOOR MOHD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is arising out of the judgment dated 26.09.2015 and order on sentence dated 28.09.2015 wherein the appellant-Noor @ Noor Mohd. was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 392/506/34 IPC. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order on sentence, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal.

(2.) Briefly facts stated are that on receiving information vide DD No.27-A, ASI Ami Chand reached at the spot at Gali No.14, Viashwas Nagar, pertaining to chain snatching and inquired about the same and recorded the statement of the complainant on 16.08.2013 and registered FIR No.344/2013, under Sections 392/397/34 IPC. During the course of investigation, the appellant-Noor @ Noor Mohd. was arrested on 18.08.2013 and recovery of Rs.2,000/- was got effected from his house. Co-accused/convict Pankaj was also arrested who got recovered Rs.1200/- from his house on 31.08.2013. Co-accused/convict Bhim was also arrested on 08.09.2013 and weapon of offence used in the robbery was recovered from his possession. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed under Section 392/397/411/34 IPC. After filing the charge sheet, prosecution examined 6 witnesses in order to prove its case. In their defence, the convict persons also examined 3 three witnesses. Upon appreciation of evidence and after considering the contentions of the appellant and his associates, they all were convicted by the impugned judgment. By an order dated 28.09.2015, the appellant was awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine he shall undergo six months simple imprisonment. He was also awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for one year under Section 506/34 IPC. All the sentences were to operate concurrently. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant has filed the instant appeal.

(3.) During the course of arguments, on instructions, the appellant's counsel stated that the appellant has opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction. He, however, prayed to modify the sentence order and to release the appellant for the period already undergone by him. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has no objection to consider the mitigating circumstances.