HUKUMSINH KHUNNISINH PARIHAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present conviction Appeal has been filed by the appellant original accused No.4, under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 02.04.2008 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Jamnagar, in Sessions Case No.03 of 2006, whereby the appellant -accused No.4 was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.15,000/ -, in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 1 year, for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/ -, in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 6 months, whereas for the offence punishable under Section -135 of the B.P. Act, no sentence was awarded, other than fine of Rs.2,500/ -.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, complainantHansraj Prajapati was manager in private financial firm and the complainant and his colleague were running firm in the name and style of "Ramesh Kumar Shankar Lal Company". On 26.10.2005, when they were doing their work in firm, at about 4:00 p.m., 3 unknown persons entered in the office, situated at Digvijay Plot, Jamnagar. After few minutes, all three persons took out country made pistol and threatened the complainant and his companions and also told to give them whatever they had and under the said fear, all three persons took cash amount of Rs.3,16, 240/ -from the cupboard. It is further the case of the complainant that thereafter, they left the place, but complainant caught one person on valiant effort made by him whereas other two persons run away from the place. Companions of the complainant followed those two persons and they succeed to catch one person and other one was succeed to escape. Two persons who were nabbed by the complainant and his companion were identified as Virendrasinh -accused No.1 and Hemant Presharam -accused No.2 and one who succeed to escape with muddamal was Hukum Singh -accused No.4 -present appellant herein. Thereafter, the complainant lodged the complaint before the City "A" Police Station bearing registration No.I -C.R.No.281 of 2005 for the offence punishable under Sections 392, 397 read with 34 of IPC, 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the B.P. Act. and handed over persons to the police. Thereafter, interrogation was made. Present appellant -accused No.4 surrendered and lodged the complaint to the police and further interrogation was made to appellant -accused No.4. In the said complaint, it was admitted by him that at the event of loot/robbery, they had red chilly powder and country made pistol and one of the pistol was recovered from the place of offence and he was also arrested and accused No.3 -Hitendrasinh was also arrested. Thereafter, statements of the witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer and during the interrogation, present appellant -accused No.4 shown his willingness to disclose something. Therefore, two panchas were called by the Investigating Officer and preliminary panchnama was drawn. As per the direction and instruction made by the present appellant -accused, they went to the place of offence in Government vehicle and from the said place, in presence of panchas, loot amount of Rs.3,16,240/ -was discovered by present appellant -accused and thereafter, second part of the panchnama was drawn by the Investigating Officer. Further, investigation was carried out. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were sent to the hospital for treatment and radiological report and medical papers of both the accused were tagged with the investigation papers. Arrest panchnama of the accused was also drawn. Then, ravangi note was prepared and recovered muddamal was sent to the FSL and sanction was obtained and entry was made by the Investigating Officer in the station diary regarding the arrest. On receipt of the FSL, charge -sheet was filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar against the present appellantsaccused for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 397 read with 34 of IPC, 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the B.P. Act. As the said case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar, committed the case to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Jamnagar, which was thereafter, numbered as Sessions Case No.03 of 2006.

(3.) ON the basis of above allegations, charge was framed against the appellants -accused vide Exh.11 and read -over and explained to the appellants -accused for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 397 read with 34 of IPC, 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the B.P. Act. Then plea was recorded, wherein, appellantsaccused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.