MAHESH @ CHHOTU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "The Code") against judgment of conviction dated 21/12/2018, passed by Seventh Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Special Sessions Trial No.160/2018, by which the appellants have been convicted for offence under Sections 393 and 427 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo 2 years R.I and 6 months RI and to pay fine of Rs.100/- and Rs.100/- respectively, with usual default stipulation.

(2.) As per prosecution case, on 28/10/2017, complainant-Shahnawaj lodged a report alleging that he was working as driver and at the time of alleged incident he was driving Swift Dzire Car of Harmeet Singh @ Goldi Bhaiyya bearing registration No. MP-13-CA-9644. At about 4:00 p.m. when they reached near Khilchipur bridge, Agar Road, Chimanganj Area, Ujjaian then three persons came on a CD-Deluxe motorcycle and they over take his car and one of them tried to robe mobile phone and purse of the complainant, when complainant tried to caught him, then after breaking the glass of the car, they fled away from the spot. The matter was reported toP the Police-Station-Chimangaj Mandi, District-Ujjain. On the basis of this information, police has registered F.I.R bearing crime No. 1074/2017 against the unknown accused persons for offence under Sections 393 and 427 of the IPC. Thereafter, police arrested the appellants. During the investigation, test identification parade was arranged, in which the complainant identified the appellants as culprit. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed before Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ujjain, who committed the case to the Sessions Court and ultimately, it was transferred to Seventh Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain.

(3.) Learned Additional Sessions Judge, farmed charge for offence under Section 393 and 427 of the IPC against the appellants, they abjured his guilt and took a plea that they have been falsely implicated in the mater. During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and has exhibited 15 documents in order to bring home the charges against the appellants/accused persons. Trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence adduced by the parties, pronounced the judgment on 21/12/2018 and concluded that the appellants are liable to be convicted for commission of offence and sentenced them as stated herein-above. This order is under challenge in the present appeal.