RAJENDRABHAI N CHAUDHARI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Appeal No.905 of 1992 has been filed by the appellants-original accused Nos.4 and 6 while CRIMINAL Appeal No.921 of 1992 has been filed by the appellant-original accused No.3 against the judgment and order dated 23-9-1992 passed by the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No.213 of 1989 whereby all the three accused were sentenced to suffer RI for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer further RI for six months for the offence punishable under Sec.307 of IPC; to suffer RI for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer further imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Sec.147 of IPC; to suffer RI for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer further RI for one month for the offence punishable under Sec.148 of IPC and to suffer RI for a period of four months for the offence punishable under Sec.135 of B.P.Act. All the substantive sentences imposed on the accused were ordered to run concurrently. The accused Nos.5 and 7 were acquitted of the charges levelled against them. Accused Nos.1 and 2 died during the pendency of trial and hence, no conviction was recorded against them.

(2.) AS common facts and law are involved in both the appeals, both the appeals were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(3.) ON submission of closing pursis by the prosecution, learned Judge recorded further statement of the accused under Sec.313 of Code of Criminal Procedure. As the accused Nos.1 and 2 were reportedly killed, their further statements could not be recorded. The accused denied all the charges and contended that they have been falsely involved. Upon affording opportunity of hearing to the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ahmedabad, delivered the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the appellants as aforesaid in the earlier part of this judgment giving rise to prefer the present appeals by the appellants.