LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-694

BACHCHU LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On January 29, 2018
BACHCHU LAL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant appeal has been preferred by appellant/accused Bachchu Lal against the impugned judgment and order dtd. 17/1/2008 passed in Sessions Trial No.177 of 2006 State Vs Bachchu Lal and others arising out of crime No.353 of 2005 U/s 452, 384, 323 r/w 34 IPC, Sessions Trial No.178 of 2006 under Sec. 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, whereby the learned Sessions Judge hold guilty to the appellant/accused under Sec. 452, 384, 323 r/w 34 and Under Sec. 3/25 of Arms Act and punished him under Sec. 452 IPC with rigorous imprisonment of 4 years and fine Rs.10,000.00, under Sec. 384 IPC rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and fine Rs.5,000.00, under Sec. 323 r/w 34 IPC rigorous imprisonment of 6 months and fine Rs.1,000.00, in default of payment of fine the appellant/accused shall further undergo 6 months, 3 months and 7 days simple imprisonment respectively and under Sec. 3/25 of Arms Act appellant/accused was punished with 2 years rigorous imprisonment and fine Rs.2,000.00, in default the appellant/accused shall further undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:- One Mr. Rajendra Prasad Rastogi filed a complaint Exhibit Ka-1 in the police station chowk alleging therein that on 18/12/2005 at about 1.30 pm at noon someone rang his call bell. When he opened the door of his house three unknown persons entered inside the house in which one person was armed with country made revolver/pistol, another was armed with khanjar and third one was armed with knife. All three persons threatened to complainant and demanded Rs.10,000.00 and further threatened that they will kill him, if he would not pay this amount. When complainant enquired that why they are demanding this amount, there upon all three unknown persons started beating to him. The person who was armed with khanjar, kept it on his chest, the complainant caught hold the hand of that person, then the miscreant who was armed with country made pistol/revolver hit by the butt of revolver on the muscle of the foot. When he made noise and asked for assistance the wife of complainant came and she caught hold the miscreant who was having khanjar in his hand and she laid down over complainant. In this very episode complainant suffered injury in his finger and other parts of his person. Meanwhile, hearing the din, so many persons of vicinity came there and they caught hold to appellant and other miscreants. In the meantime the police personnel Mr. Tiwari and Mr. Singh, Sub Inspector and Constable came to his house, who also assisted in nabbing the appellant and other miscreants. When the appellant and other miscreants sensed that they will be apprehended, then appellant/accused Bachchu Lal shot a fire, which did not hit to anyone and passed out from the gate. After apprehending the appellant and other miscreants, complainant got scribed F.I.R. Exhibit Ka-1 from one Ravindra Kumar Rastogi and the complaint and accused persons were handed over to the police personnel, who came at the time of occurrence at the place of incident. Later on, memo of recovery of arms and arrest of the accused was recorded by sub-inspector Sri Kuldeep Tiwari on spot, under the dictation of inspector and submitted to the appellant alongwith other co-accused to police station. The complainant Rajendra Prasad Rastogi presented Exhibit Ka-1 to the police station, pursuance of which formal First Information Report (for brevity FIR) was registered against appellant and other co-accused.

(3.) After registration of the case, the appellant alongwith other accused and complainant were forwarded to Balrampur Hospital for medical examination. The matter was investigated by Anil Kumar Chaturvedi Sub Inspector, who after completion of the investigation submitted charge sheet against appellant Bachchu Lal alongwith other co-accused under Sec. 452, 384, 307, 323 and 504 IPC Exhibit Ka-6 and charge sheet under Sec. 3/25 of Arms Act separately against appellant Bachchu Lal.