PARMJIT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE five appeals, particulars whereof are given in the title of this judgment, are being disposed of by a common judgment, because all of them arise out of the same judgment, i.e. judgment dated 19.5.2005 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una, whereby the appellants have been convicted of offences, under 395 and 397 IPC, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/ -; in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years each, in respect of offence, under Section 395 IPC, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ -; in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year each, in respect of offence, under Section 397 IPC.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, as per evidence on record, is like this. PW -1 Pawan Singh and PW -3 Paramjit Singh were employed as salesmen at a petrol pump at Gagret, in the year 2003. They were on duty on the night intervening 28th and 29th May, 2003. Around 12.45 a.m. (midnight) when PW -1 Pawan Singh was outside the roofed structure of petrol pump, attending to customers and PW -3 Paramjit Singh was inside the structure, an Indica car, black coloured, bearing registration No.PB -08 -5785 came there. There were 6 -7 persons in that car. They asked for petrol. When PW -1 Pawan Singh was filling the petrol, all the occupants of the car came out and two of them held Pawan Singh by his arm, while one of them gagged him by forcing a handkerchief in his mouth. Others went to the roofed structure, where PW -3 Paramjit Singh was present. They took him to the store room and tied him to a chair and bolted that room from outside. PW -1 Pawan Singh was asked to produce the key of cash almirah. He told that he was not aware as to where the key had been kept by the owner. He was beaten up and shut in a bath room. A sum of Rs.15,000 -16000/ -, which was with PW -1 Pawan Singh in the cash bag, was taken away by the occupants of the car. They removed the key of the scooter from the pocket of the pants, which he was wearing and also disconnected the telephone and carried with them the telephone instrument. Thereafter, they fled from the scene alongwith their car. PW -1 Pawan Singh somehow managed to get out of the bath room. He unbolted the store, in which PW -3 Paramjit Singh had been tied to a chair and untied him. The two then went to a nearby Police Post and informed Constable Kamal Krishan, present at the post, who, in turn, rang up the SHO, Police Station, Gagret, namely PW19 Inspector Kailash Walia. Police party headed by PW -19 Inspector Kailash Walia reached the spot. PW -1 Pawan Singh made a statement Ext. PW1/A, which was recorded, under Section 154 Cr. PC. It was sent to Police Station for formal registration of the case.

(3.) DURING the course of investigation, police came to know that car bearing registration No. PB -08 -5785 had crossed toll tax barrier at Gagret, twice. Initially it crossed the barrier at 12.45 a.m, when it appeared from Hoshiarpur side and it again crossed the barrier on way back to Hoshiarpur side 20 -25 minutes later, without paying the tax. On 14.6.2003, PW -20 S.I. Angrej Singh, Incharge CIA Staff, Jalandhar, on a tip off that appellants Gurpreet, Surjit, Paramjit, Raju and Deepak were planning to commit robbery and dacoity, laid a Nakka on Kapurthala road at a place called Bariana and apprehended appellants Paramjit, Gurpreet and Surjit on the spot, while two others managed to escape. Appellant Gurpreet was carrying .315 bore pistol, appellant Surjit was carrying handle of hand -pump and appellant Paramjit was carrying an iron rod. They were interrogated. Appellant Paramjit Singh disclosed that out of the booty of dacoity committed at petrol pump in Himachal Pradesh, he had received Rs.10,500/ - and gave details where he had spent/kept that money. Similarly, appellant Gurpreet also gave details of an amount of Rs.10,500/ - of his alleged share of booty from petrol pump in Himachal Pradesh. Appellant Surjit Singh got recovered Rs.8500/ - in cash and stated that Rs.2000/ - had been spent by him. Thus, the three appellants accounted for Rs.31,500/ - to PW -20 SI Angrej Singh.