YOGENDRA @ KHUDA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above three appeals stem from the common Judgment and order dated 23.3.2007, therefore, they have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Appellants have assailed the common impugned judgment and order dated 23.3.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 13/Fast Track Court No. 4 Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 1022 of 2004 (State v. Yogendra @ Khudda and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 134 of 2004 under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sessions Trial No. 1023 of 2004 (State v. Yogendra @ Khudda) arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2004 under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station (P.S.) Nauhjheel District Mathura whereby appellant Yogendra @ Khudda has been convicted under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act. Remaining appellants, namely, Rakesh, Khajaan, Malkhan, Ghantoli @ Yashpal and Sanjay have been convicted under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC only. Appellants Yogendra @ Khudda, Rakesh, Khajaan, Malkhan, Ghantoli @ Yashpal and Sanjay have been sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and fine of Rs. 2000/- with default stipulation. They have also been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 147, 148 IPC. Appellant Yogendra @ Khudda has also been sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 25 Arms Act and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation.

(3.) Prosecution story in brief is that relationship between appellant Yogendra @ Khudda and family of informant/complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) was antagonistic. Complainant Prabhu bought one Eicher Tractor in partnership with one Lalaram (P.W.2). Lalaram somehow received information that appellant Yogendra @ Khudda was scheming to snatch the tractor. On receiving this information, Lalaram (P.W.2) came to complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) on 9.7.2004 and called appellant Yogendra @ Khudda for questioning. Complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) and his son Mukut (deceased) were also present. Row erupted between appellant Yogendra @ Khudda and deceased Mukut but P.W. 1 Prabhu, P.W.2 Lalaram and one Habura managed to broker peace and brought deceased Mukut back to his residence.