PATEL SANJAY VINUBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12. 10. 2006, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No. 28 of 2006, whereby the appellants-original accused no. 1 is convicted for the offences punishable u/s. 149, 365, 323, 506 (2), 395 r/w. Section 114 IPC. For conviction u/s. 365, the appellant was sentenced to undergo R. I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, S. I. for a further period of three months; for conviction u/s. 323 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo R. I. for three months and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, S. I. for a further period of seven days; for conviction u/s. 506 (2) IPC, he was sentenced to undergo R. I. for six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, S. I. for a further period of fifteen days and for conviction under Section 395 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo R. I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, S. I. for a further period of six months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as under :

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant has submitted out of five accused persons, only the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s. 395, 365, 149, 323, 504, 506 (2) and 114 IPC. He has further submitted that in view of the definition of "dacoity" as defined nuder Section 391 IPC, the conviction passed u/s. 149 and 395 IPC is bad and erroneous. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ram Lakhan v. State of U. P. reported in AIR 1983 SC pg. 352, wherein the Court has held that conviction of appellant alone is unsustainable as assembly of five persons is necessary to make offence u/s. 395 IPC.