RAJU Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The four appellants before us, namely, Raju @ Namit Kumar, Manjeet, Mintoo and Narendra Singh stand convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 10,000/- each in S.T. No. 371 of 2010 (State Vs. Raju @ Namit Kumar and others) under Section 302 I.P.C. readwith Section 34 I.P.C. arising out of Case Crime No. 282 of 2010, P.S. Kotwali City, District-Bijnor. In case of default in the payment of fine, the accused-appellants are to further undergo detention for a period of one year. One of the accused-appellant Narendra Singh has been convicted and sentenced for one year rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 1000/- in S.T. No. 372 of 2010 (State Vs. Narendra Singh) under Section 4/25 Arms Act arising out of Case Crime No. 286 of 2010, P.S., Kotwali City, District-Bijnor. In case of default in the payment of fine, the accused-appellant, Narendra Singh is to further undergo detention for a period of three months.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Rizwan Ahmad holding brief of Mr. Dileep Kumar, the learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 4547 of 2012, Raju @ Namit Kumar Vs. State and Criminal Appeal No. 3745 of 2012 (Manjeet and another Vs. State), Mr. Birendra Kumar Pal, Advocate holding brief of Deepak Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 4024 of 2012 (Narendra Singh Vs. State). Mr. Arunendra Kumar Singh, the learnged A.G.A. assisted by Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sahi brief holder and Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, A.G.A. for the State-respondent and Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh the learned counsel for the complainant.

(3.) The paper books in these appeals have not been prepared by the Office. However, learned counsels for the appellants, the learned A.G.A. and Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the complainant have agreed to the hearing of the present criminal appeals as according to them the issue involved in these criminal appeals is a very short one and the appeals can be heard on the basis of the record, which is already available. Accordingly, we permitted the counsel for the respective parties to peruse the original record. Thereafter, the Court has proceeded to hear the present criminal appeals with the aid of the original record itself.