YOGESH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 8/12/2021 passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in S.T. No.118/2016 (State of M.P. Vs. Yogesh and another), whereby appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under Sec. 392/34 of I.P.C. and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.500.00. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further R.I. for fifteen days.

(2.) As per the prosecution story, on 14/3/2016, Bhimdayal (PW-1) submitted an application in writing before police stating that he is resident of village Kosmi P.S. Katangi District Balaghat. On 13/3/2016, he along with his fiancee Rukhmani Patel from motorcycle had gone to Simariya for Darshan of Hanumanji. After Darshan of Simariya Hanumanji, he along with his fiancee also did Darshan of Sillewani Ghati Majaar. When they both were sitting near Sillewani culvert, at around 12:30 p.m., two unknown persons came and said " you bloody are doing bad work here, give money" and snatched two mobiles and Rs.500.00 cash from them and fled away towards jungle area. Mobiles were of Samsung and Mircomax companies. He can identify and recognize both the persons as one of them was wearing blue colour lower and another was wearing black colour jersey. On the basis of written complaint Ex.P/1, FIR (Ex.P/16) was registered in P.S. Mohkhed District Chhindwara for commission of offence under Sec. 392/34 of IPC. In the course of investigation, accused was arrested and from his possession one mobile of Samsung company and another mobile of Micromax Company Model Nos.J-2 and X-096 were recovered. Seizure memo Ex.P/9 was prepared. Test Identification parade was conducted in District Jail, Chhindwara and in it, Bhimdayal (PW-1) and Rukhmani (PW-2) identified him as perpetrator of the crime. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

(3.) Learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charge for commission of offence under Sec. 392 read with Sec. 34 of IPC against the appellant. Appellant abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried.