SANDEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction dtd. 1/9/2010, vide which the appellants were held guilty for committing offence punishable under Sec. 392 IPC as the charge against appellant No.2- Sunil Kumar @ Midha under Sec. 25 of the Arms Act was not proved and he was acquitted of this charge as well as the order of sentence dtd. 4/9/2010 vide which both the appellants were sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years under Sec. 392 IPC along with fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in default thereof, further to undergo RI for 6 months. Additionally, appellant No.2-Sunil Kumar @ Midha was sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years for committing offence punishable under Sec. 397 IPC along with fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default thereof, he was directed to further undergo RI for 1 year. Both the sentences imposed on appellant No.2-Sunil Kumar @ Midha were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) on a liquor vend of Village Deban and the accused persons had robbed the cash box/galla of the owner of vend. On reaching the liquor vend, he found complainant Mukesh Kumar son of Tara Chand and recorded his statement that he is resident of Village Ram Rai, PS Sadar, Jind and is an agriculturist by profession. He is also a partner in a liquor vend at Village Deban. On 31/8/2009, at about 10.00 PM when he was present at the liquor vend, the employee of the liquor vend had gone to the restaurant opposite to liquor vend for taking dinner, two young boys aged about 23-24 years came there and started consuming beer in front of the liquor vend and also obtained some egg dish(crumbled) from the abutting shop owner. When one of the accused demanded one more bottle of beer, the complainant went inside the liquor vend and opened the camphor for taking out the beer, the second boy lifted the cash box from the liquor vend. In the meantime, the boy, who was wearing blue shirt, took out the country made pistol and shouted that if the complainant tried to raise the voice he will be eliminated. Thereafter both the assailants ran away along with the cash box. The complainant stated that the accused had looted the amount of Rs.10,000.00 lying in the cash box on a pistol point. Accordingly, the FIR was registered and thereafter, the investigations were completed and the report under Sec. 173 Cr.P.C. was filed. Both the accused were arrested in the FIR No.600, dtd. 21/9/2009, under Ss. 398/401 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act and during the interrogation accused-Sandeep Kumar suffered a disclosure statement regarding the offence committed by him along with co-accused Sunil Kumar @ Midha of robbing the complainant with his amount. The amount of Rs.43,00.00 was recovered from Sandeep Kumar. Thereafter, the prosecution led its evidence and the trial Court convicted both the appellants for the offences punishable under Sec. 392 IPC and appellant No.2-Sunil Kumar @ Midha was also held guilty for offence punishable under Sec. 397 IPC.

(3.) It is further submitted that the appellants have already spent their prime youth time in the judicial lockup. Therefore, it is prayed that by taking a lenient view regarding appellant No.2-Sunil Kumar @ Midha, his sentence may be reduced to the sentence already undergone by him.