BHOLA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgement will dispose of two criminal appeals bearing No. 158 -SB of 1996 and 346 -SB of 1996 as both these appeals have been filed against common judgement and order dated January 12, 1996 vide which appellants were convicted for commission of offences under Sections 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the Code) and Section 397 read with Section 34 of the Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - each under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Code. In default of payment of fine, they were to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Both of them were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and were ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - each and in default of payment of fine, they were to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 397 read with Section 34 of the Code. All the substantive Sentences were ordered to rum concurrently. For facility of dictating judgement, facts are being mentioned from Criminal Appeal No. 158 -SB of 1996.

(2.) APPELLANTS -accused were sent for trial for commission of offences under Sections 392/397/34 IPC on the allegations that they on June 5, 1990, robed one Pohu Singh (PW3) of his tractor bearing registration No. PJS 6689 (Eicher make) at pistol point, in the area of village Jangiana, Police Station Bhadaur, district Sangrur. First infornnation report was recorded at the instance of Pohu Singh (PW3), wherein he stated that on June 5, 1990, at about 7 P.M., he was going on his tractor from Bhadaur to his village. When he reached near the path leading to village Alkara, two persons with muffled faces, out of whom one was Sikh and the other was clean -shaven, stopped his tractor and directed him to hand over the same to them. Pohu Singh was reluctant to do so. Then one of the assailants placed pistol on his chest and directed him to hand over the tractor, if he wanted to save his life. Being terrified, Pohu Singh handed over the tractor to the assailants. While going away from the spot, both of them told him that he should not talk to anybody regarding snatching of his tractor, otherwise, he would face serious consequences. After their exit, Pohu Singh proceeded towards Police Station to lodge a complaint. Police party met him on the way. His statement was recorded. Culprits were chased by the police party and both of them were apprehended when they were going towards village Talwandi on tractor, which was robed from Pohu Singh. Tractor was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PA. On personal search of both the accused, pistol of .12 bore along with two live cartridges of the same bore were also recovered from both of them, regarding which separate F.I.Rs. were recorded against both of them. On receipt of intimation from the police party, formal FIR Ex. PB/1 was recorded. Thereafter investigation was completed as per law and rules. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted before the competent Court for trial.

(3.) PROSECUTION then led evidence to prove its case, Pohu Singh (PW3), the complainant, was declared hostile and was cross - examined by the Public Prosecutor. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein they denied allegations of the prosecution, as levelled against them, and pleaded false implication. Accused Bhola Singh brought it to the notice of the trial Court he was acquitted in a case registered against him under the Arms Act, 1959 and placed reliance upon a certified copy of judgement dated October 1, 1992, (Ex. D1) to support his contention. Trial Court, on appraisal of evidence as led by both the parties, came to a conclusion that guilt of both the accused was proved on record and accordingly convicted and sentenced them as mentioned in para 1 of this judgement. Hence these two appeals.