DODRAJ Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Sec. 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dtd. 22/10/1983 in St. No. 438 of 1982 State Vs. Dodraj and others, whereby the accused appellants Shree Ram, Ram Bahadur were convicted for charge under Sec. 302/149 IPC and Sec. 148 IPC, for which they were sentenced to imprisonment for life and one year rigorous imprisonment respectively and the remaining five accused persons Dodraj, Ram Swaroop, Neksoo, Summeri alias Bhadain and Kallan alias Kalyan were convicted under Ss. 147 and 302/149 IPC and each of them have been sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment for charge under Sec. 147 IPC and life imprisonment for charge under Sec. 302/149 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The appellants were enlarged on bail vide order dtd. 27/10/1983 passed in instant appeal during the pendency of appeal. Appellants Dodraj, Ram Swaroop, Neksoo, Summeri alias Bhadain, Shree Ram and Kallan alias Kalyan have died during the pendency of appeal and appeal has been dismissed for these deceased appellants as having abated by various orders passed by this Court in the present appeal. Thus the appeal at present survives in respect of appellant Ram Bahadur only, and it has been argued in respect of appellant Ram Bahadur by the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) This fact is noticeable that appellant No.2 Ram Bahadur, the sole surviving appellant moved an application before this Court with a prayer to consider his juvenality at the time of offence, as he was aged about 17 years at the time of incident. This Court heard learned counsel for the parties, on this application filed on behalf of appellant No.2 Ram Bahadur, wherein he claimed juvenality, and on 16/2/2022 passed an order to the effect that the application filed by the applicant/appellant alongwith all the documents be forwarded to the concerned session judge, and, in turn, the concerned sessions judge shall conduct an appropriate inquiry for determining the age of the appellant No.2. It is also directed in the said order the the concerned sessions judge, after conducting an appropriate inquiry in accordance with law, shall send his report before this Court.