PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Judgment, I propose to dispose of CriminalAppeal no. 205/86- Pawan Kumar vs. State, and Criminal appeal no. 4/87-Sandeep Kumar vs. State, as they arise out of common Judgment of Shri SagarChand Jain, Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, dated 9-12-1986. Even thoughtwo separate challans under Sections 392/34 and 397 Indian Penal Code against both theaccused and the other under Section 27/54/59 Arms Act against Pawan Kumaraccused, were filed but the learned lower court ordered their consolidation asthey related to the same incident. Accused Suresh Kumar has since been giventhe benefit of doubt and acquitted.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, on the intervening night between 3 1/01/1980 and 1/02/1980, Mustkin(PW-3)alongwith his friendRauf(PW-4) were returning to their home after seeing a night show at AlankarCinema. When they reached near over-bridge of Nehru Nagar adjoining RingRoad within the jurisdiction of P.S. Sri Niwaspuri, all the three accused personsin furtherance of their common intention committed robbery on the person ofMustkin son of Mohd. Ali, by putting him/under fear of death or hurt androbbed him of one wrist watch make Teknika 17 jewels and cash amounting toRs. 345.00. It has also been alleged that accused Pawan at that time was armedwith spring-actuated knife and he used the same while committing robbery.

(3.) Accused Pawan and Sandeep were apprehended at a distance ofabout 20 paces from the place of occurrence by the Police party which was onpatrol duty at that time. The third accused Suresh managed to escape. It isthe further case of the prosecution that from the possession of Sandeep, thewrist watch belonging to Mustkin was recovered. The knife which accusedPawan Kumar was holding was also taken into possession. Its sketch wasprepared and later on both the articles were converted into separate sealedparcels.