MAHAVIR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No.1820 of 2004 by the accused appellants Mahavir, Devendra and Abhilakh, Criminal Appeal No.1698 of 2004 by accused-appellant Ramvir and Criminal Appeal No.1397 of 2004 by accused-appellant Sarvesh have been filed challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 21/24.02.2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, District Shahjahanpur, in Sessions Trial No.376 of 2001 (State of U.P. v. Ramvir and others); Crime No.243 of 2000, Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur, whereby all the accused-appellants were convicted under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and the accused-appellants Ramvir and Abhilakh were convicted under Section 436 I.P.C. and all the accused appellants were sentenced under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. with life imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- each; under Section 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. with seven years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 148 I.P.C. with three months rigorous imprisonment and the accused-appellants Ramvir and Abhilakh were also sentenced under Section 436 I.P.C. with five years' rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 2000/- each and all sentences were to run concurrently. As these appeals, arise out of a common judgment dated 21/24.02.2004, they were heard together, and are being decided together.

(2.) It is relevant to mention that during the pendency of these criminal appeals accused-appellant no.3 Abhilakh in Criminal Appeal No.1820 of 2004 has died. Therefore, the appeal filed on his behalf stands abated vide order dated 13.01.2017 of this Court.

(3.) It is also relevant to mention here that Naresh was one of the named accused in this case. However, he was acquitted by the learned trial Court vide same impugned judgment and order dated 21.2.2004 for the offences under Section 147, 148, 302, 307 read with 149 I.P.C. Accused-appellants Abhilakh, Devendra, Ramvir and Sarvesh were also acquitted for the offence under Section 25 Arms Act by the same impugned judgment.