NANU KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in these appeals is to the judgment dated July 24, 2000 of the learned Sessions Sawai Madhopur whereby Nanu Khan and Jagdish, the appellants herein, have been convicted and sentenced as under:- Nanu Khan: u/s. 302 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. u/s. 394 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. Jagdish: u/s. 302/34 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. u/s. 394 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) AT the time of hearing of appeal (No. 504 2004) we notice that only appellant Nanu Khan preferred the appeal, therefore we directed Registry to make enquiry as to whether convict Jagdish had preferred appeal or not. The Registry on the basis of report of Superintendent Central Jail Jaipur informed that convict Jagdish did not prefer any appeal. Having scanned the report of Superintendent Central Jail Jaipur, we find that two letters of Jagdish dated September 20, 2000 and November 25, 2006, written by Jagdish, have been appended with the report. In the letter dated September 20, 2000 Jagdish made request to Superintendent Central Jail Jaipur to file appeal, but the jail authorities did not accede the request. It appears that Jagdish was under the impression that his appeal was fired, therefore he made enquiry as to when his appeal came to be filed, therefore he made enquiry as to when his appeal came to be filed, therefore vide letter dated September 13, 2006 sent from Bharatpur Jail he made enquiry about his appeal. Jagdish has already undergone confinement for more than six years and we cannot render his remedy less. In the interest of justice we treat letters of convict Jagdish as appeal and in the facts and circumstances condone the delay. We directed the Registry to register the appeal today, so that the appeal preferred by convict Jagdish can be disposed of along with the appeal preferred by co-accused Nanu Khan.

(3.) COMING to the circumstance of last seen we notice that in the written report (Ex. P. 1) the information Badri Prasad stated that at the time of lodging the report Jagdish was present there. He indicated as under:-