MOHAN PRAKASH @ MONU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have impugned the judgment and order of sentence dated 14.02.2011 and 21.02.2011 respectively wherein the appellants stand convicted under Sections 393/398/34 of the IPC as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. They have been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 1 month for the offence under Section 393 of the IPC. For their conviction under Section 398 of the IPC they have been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-each, in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 1 month. For their offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act they have been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each, in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 1 month. The sentences are to run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. has been given to the appellants.

(2.) All the appellants are on bail. The nominal roll of the appellant Mohan Prakash @ Monu shows that he had been released on bail on 15.3.2013; till that date he had undergone incarceration of about 4 years. Appellant Shankar @ Babu is on bail since 17.01.2013; till that date he had undergone incarceration of about 4 years. The third appellant Tapesh Sharma is on bail since 25.01.2014; till that date he had undergone incarceration of about 5 years and 3 months.

(3.) The version of the prosecution is that on 30.12.2008 in the evening at about 4.00 p.m. an information was received in the local police station that the appellant Mohan Prakash @ Monu along with the other two co-accused Shankar @ Babu and Tapesh Sharma had entered into the office of the complainant Raja Ram Verma at BSA Infomedia, 202, IInd Floor, Gupta Complex, Inderlok, Delhi. Appellant Tapesh took out a deshi katta whereas appellants Mohan Prakash and Shanker took out knives and by brandishing them upon the victims they asked the complainant and his office staff to hand over all the cash amount which was lying at their office failing which they would be killed. Alarm was raised; public persons gathered at the spot. The appellants tried to flee but they were apprehended. FIR was accordingly registered.