Decided on March 06,2007

STATE Respondents


- (1.) The appellants were convicted by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge under Section 395 read with Section 397 IPC vide judgment dated 21st July, 1999 and were sentenced to undergo 7 years RI and a fine of Rs.250/- each vide judgment dated 23rd July, 1999. They have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of sentence.
(2.) The brief facts as narrated by the Trial Court giving rise to the offence are as under: ?On 16.6.1995 at 10.15 p.m. a wireless message was received at P.P. Shidhi Pura, P.S. Desh Bandhu Gupta Road that a person who had been looted and injured by four or five men, was being taken to RML Hospital in PCR Van. The information was entered at serial no. 30 in the Roznamcha (PW 17/A). On receipt of DD NO. 30 SI Nand Ram went to RML Hospital and there he obtained MLC of Sudhir Aggarwal (PW 1). He was told that the injured had been taken by his relatives to Maharaja Uggarsain Hospital, Punjabi Bagh. Accordingly, SI Nand Ram went to Uggarsain Hospital at about 1.00 a.m. but the injured was declared 'unfit for statement'. One hour later SI Nand Ram again approached the doctor and this time Sudhir Aggarwal was certified to be 'fit for statement'. SI Nand Ram examined him and he stated as follows: 'I live at above address with my family. I am a Chartered Accountant by profession. My office is situated on the third floor of property No. 10159 Padam Singh Road. At about 9.00 p.m. I closed my office and went to Hanuman Temple at Tuglak Road in my maruti car no. DL-8CA-6161. After making obeisance at the temple I left for my home at 9.30 p.m. I turned from Rani Jhansi Road to New Rohtak Road at about 9.45 p.m. A young boy aged about 20/25 years, dark complexion, height about 5' 6? came in front of my car in drunken condition. He was wearing light blue T-shirt and pant. I stopped the car. That boy came to the window on the driver's side and said in anger that I was not driving properly. In the meantime another boy came on the other side of the car near the front window. He was also aged about 20/25 years and his complexion was dark. He opened the door and then he opened the rear door also. He sat by my side. Three other boys occupied the rear seat. All of them took out daggers. The boy, who was standing at my side asked me to leave the steering. He kept injuring me with a knife. He also kept asking me to move aside. He snatched my wrist watch and removed Rs.400/500 from my pocket. My briefcase containing my diary, letter pad and other papers besides Rs.20/25 thousand in cash and keys was lying on the rear seat. It was picked up by the miscreants. I got out of the left window to save myself and raised alarm. These boys ran away in a three wheeler towards New Rohtak Road with the briefcase. I could not note the number of the three wheeler. The three boys, who were sitting on the rear seat were in the age group of 20/25 years. I can identify on seeing them.?
(3.) The appellants Vinod and Kamal were arrested under Section 21 of NDPS Act in FIR No. 280/1995 and 281/1995 respectively by police of Paharganj on 30th May, 1995 for possessing narcotic drugs. On interrogation the two accused made disclosure about their involvement in the robbery of this case. They also disclosed the names of their other accomplices and told police that they were to assemble at 'Liberty' cinema on the same day in the evening. Both the accused were taken to 'Liberty' cinema by a police team led by SI, Tarkeshwar Singh and SI, Anil Kumar and they pointed out to their other accomplices, who had arrived at 'Liberty' cinema, namely Mukesh Kumar, Sanjay and Manoj. They were overpowered and arrested by the police team and further interrogated. On interrogation of accused Mukesh Kumar, briefcase and diary of the victim were recovered from his house at Gali No. 9 Multani Dhandha although the money in the briefcase had been spent by them. They were produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate for TIP in unmuffled face. They refused to participate in TIP. Two more accused persons Kishan and Kanha were also arrested by the police in this case on the information received from the accused persons about their involvement. Kanha also refused to undergo TIP. Identification of case property was got done and the victim/complainant identified his briefcase and diary in property TIP before Shri Narender Kumar, MM.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.