SHERFUDDIN ALIAS VELLAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the above Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment dated 10.1.1996 rendered in S.C.No.83 of 1995 by the Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Madras, thereby convicting the appellants/accused 1,2,3 and 5 for the offence punishable under Section 395 r/w 397 IPC. and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for 7 years.

(2.) The charge against the appellants/accused is that on 8.8.1993 at about 9.30 p.m. the accused joining hands with one Pandarakkannu entrained with common intention to rob one Rajagopal, who was returning from the nursing home after admitting his wife for delivery in between Kodambakkam and Nungambakkam Railway Stations, the first accused armed with iron pipe, accused Nos. 2,3 and 4 armed with button knife and standing near the door, posing threat to kill the said Rajagopal, snatched his gold chain, gold bracelet, two gold rings and one wrist watch, all worth about Rs.1,00,000/- thereby the accused committing the offence punishable under Sections 392 and 395 r/w 399 IPC.

(3.) The learned II Additional Sessions Judge would conduct a full trial in which the prosecution which is burdened to prove the charge against the appellants/accused beyond all reasonable doubts, would examine 16 witnesses as P.Ws. 1 to 16 for oral evidence, marked 32 documents as Exs. P.1 to P.32 besides marking 19 material objects as M.Os. 1 to 19. Only one document would be marked on the side of defence as Ex. D1. The Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, in full consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and the material objects brought-forth by the prosecution, would ultimately arrive at the conclusion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts thereby convicting the appellants/accused under Section 395 r/w 397 IPC. and sentencing them as aforementioned. Testifying the validity of the said conviction and sentence, the 5th accused has come forward to prefer the above criminal appeal in C.A.No. 132 of 1996 and the Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have preferred the Criminal Appeal in C.A.No. 543 of 1997 on certain grounds as brought-forth in the grounds of appeals.