AJAY @ MUNNA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal is to impugned judgment of 30th Sept., 2015 vide which appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 392 of Penal Code read with Sec. 397 of Penal Code and to order of 20th Nov., 2015 vide which appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 5,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, trial court has directed that appellant shall undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for the aforesaid offences. The facts emerging from impugned judgment are as under: -

(2.) Apart from evidence of complainant (PW-1) and public witness (PW-5), there is other evidence on record on which trial court has relied upon to convict appellant-accused while discarding his version of false implication.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant submits that in pursuance to issuance of production warrants, appellant was produced in custody before the Court and he had interacted with appellant.