NARENDRA SHARMA ALIAS PAPPU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED Narendra Sharma @ Pappu S/o Mahendra Sharma preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Alwar, in Sessions Case No. 45/2003, whereby he was convicted under Sections 328 and 397 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC') to seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months additional rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that a written- report (Exhibit P-3) was lodged on 26. 5. 2002 at Police Station, Kotwali - Alwar, by Babulal Meena (PW-6) S/o Navratan, stating therein that on 24. 5. 2002 her sister-in-law (Bhabhi) fell down from a tree and on that account she sustained injuries, therefore, they brought her to the Government Hospital for treatment. On 25. 5. 2002, when they were taking their meals in- front of the hospital, at about 4. 00 PM one 35 to 40 years old person came there and told them that he would arrange IT Card for them and thereby they may be able to get free medicines and meals from the hospital itself. He further told us to bring our ration- card for that purpose. On his saying, he went to his village and brought the ration card. That person came back on 26. 5. 2002 at about 7'o clock in the morning accompanied with one another person, who was introduced by him as his younger brother, and asked them about the ration-card; we replied that it has been summoned. On this, he told them that he has to go to his village today; he further told that this is his younger brother and asked them to go with him to immediately arrange for one Photostat copy of the ration-card. Thereupon, he sent his brother-in-law (gainer) to immediately arrange for one Photostat copy of ration- card; and then he (complainant), his father Navratan and that person remained in the hospital itself. Thereafter that person told him that he will take his father with him as he is an old person and Doctor will prepare a card immediately on seeing the old man, and thus his father went with that person. He also told them that his younger brother Narendra Sharma is already with them and in case there is any need of anything then they may tell him. He disclosed his name as Ramesh Chand Sharma. Thereafter Narendra Sharma tried to run away but they caught hold of him and asked him about the complainant's father. Narendra told him that he does not know anything about Ramesh Chand Sharma and he is not his brother. They told Narendra that in the morning he was introduced as his younger brother and now why he is denying. Thereafter at about 2. 30 PM two persons brought complainant's father in a tempo in unconscious condition and only thereafter they came to know that a cash amount of Rs. 21,000/- and gold- earrings weighing 1/2 tola (one Tola measures about twelve grams) of his father were stolen. On the basis of this written-report. an FIR No. 220/2002 was registered under Sections 328, 379 and 120-B, IPC.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the accused-appellant lastly contended that the accused-appellant has already remained in jail for about four years and ten months as he is in jail since 26. 5. 2002, and, in case, this court does not agree with his contention and accused is not acquitted then, at least, his sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to a period of sentence of imprisonment already undergone by him.