SRI PAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for Appellants and learned Govt. Advocate.

(2.) Both the appeal arise out of one and same Session Trial , i.e Session Trial No. 532 of 1997 as well as Session Trial No. 532A of 1997, where by the Appellants who were charged under Ss. ,/,/ IPC and have been convicted for maximum term of life imprisonment with fine stipulation thereof as such are being taken together for the purpose of consideration of bail in pending bail.

(3.) We have gone through the judgment of the court below as well as lower court record. As it comes out that in the mid night on the high way, a road hold up robbery was done wherein the Appellants are said to have participated and during the said act the driver of the truck who tried to escape/flee away from the spot was chased and is said to have been fired, due to which he died. FIR of the same was lodged by a constable who was on patrol duty and who was also examined as P.W. -1. It has been argued by the learned Counsel for Appellants that Appellants have been named in the FIR and it is quite improbable that if the commission of robbery is conducted, the accused persons would go for the same without concealing their identity and will commit the crime. Further it has also been submitted that it seems to be quite un -natural that in the road hold up robbery, how can the accused persons be identified in the dark night and that too by a constable. It has also been submitted that there is no recovery of any looted article. Further it has been argued that P.W. -2 who is said to be a driver of another truck who was produced as witness, has also turned hostile and merely on the basis of statement of P.W. -1 , conviction has been based.