BUNTI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-convict Bunti, hereinafter referred to as the accused, has assailed the judgment dated 31.12.2012, passed by Sessions Judge, Sirmaur, District at Nahan, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No.10-ST/7 of 2009/6-ST/7 of 2012, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh v. Bunti, whereby he stands convicted for having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of Sections 458, 380, 394, 395, 397, 353, 332, 307, 341, 342, read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 341 IPC; simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 342 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 458 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 380 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 394 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 395 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 397 IPC; simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 353 IPC; simple imprisonment for a period of one year, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 332 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 307 IPC; and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, in relation to offence, punishable under Section 120B IPC.

(2.) After the matter was heard for some time, under instructions, learned counsel for the appellantaccused, chose not to press the appeal on merits. However, he prayed for reduction in the sentence, so imposed by the trial Court.

(3.) Mr. R.S. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, invites our attention to various documents and testimonies of the witnesses, establishing, beyond reasonable doubt, guilt of the accused. I am satisfied that the findings returned and the reasons assigned by the trial Court for convicting the accused of the charged offences.