NAND KISHORE RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.667 of 2015 wherein Nand Kishore Ram is the appellant, Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 678 of 2015 wherein Ajay Paswan @ Badal is the appellant. Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 680 of 2015 wherein Ashok Mahto @ Ashok Kumar is the appellant and Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 713 of 2015 wherein Vijay Kumar Singh @ Vijay Prasad is the appellant commonly originate against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09.09.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, IInd, Danapur, Patna in Sessions Trial No.1443/2012 whereby and whereunder all the appellants have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 395/34 of the IPC and each one has been directed to undergo R.I. for ten years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.5000/- in default thereof, undergo S.I. for six months.

(2.) Before coming to descant the appeal on its merit, from the judgment impugned, it is evident that the learned lower court did not consider the ingredients of the Section 395 IPC and that happens to be reason behind having a conclusion at the end of the learned lower court identifying the appellants to be guilty under Section 395/34 of the IPC. 34 is not applicable relating to offence punishable under Section 395 IPC because of the fact that definition of dacoity itself divulges presence of more than five persons. That being so, the learned Presiding Officer, henceforth will try to keep the basic feature, ingredients and the requirement of law while adjudicating upon the lis.

(3.) Prosecution case, as is evident from the fardbeyan of Ranjan Kumar Chaudhary, PW.1, Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Pareb Branch, recorded on 27.02.2012 at about 03:30 PM is to the effect that on the same day at about 02:40 PM during course of recess hour while the bank officials were taking lunch, the arm burglar appeared who overpowered them on the pretext of firearm and then, thereafter, decamped with the cash appertaining to Rs.17,96,450/- whereupon, Bihta P.S. Case No.49/2012 was registered against unknown. It is also evident that during course of investigation so many persons including appellants were apprehended along with firearms, alleged booty and that being so, charge sheet was submitted under Section 395, 412/34 of the IPC which ultimately led passage to trial meeting with ultimate result, the subject matter of instant appeal.