N. K. Mehrotra, J. - (1.) THESE are the criminal revisions under Section 397/401, Cr. P.C. against the judgment and order dated 5.9.1997, passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1993 upholding the order of conviction, maintaining the sentence awarded under Section 452, I.P.C. and maintaining the sentence of fine of Rs. 3,000 awarded under Section 376, I.P.C. but enhancing the sentence to 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376, I.P.C. in Sessions Trial No. 394 of 1990, State v. Ashok and others.
(2.) SINCE both the revisions have been filed against the same judgment, these revisions are decided together by this judgment. Heard the learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned Addl. Government Advocate. It appears that the accused revisionists were tried for the charge under Sections 452 and 376, I.P.C. Learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Unnao, convicted both the accused under Sections 452 and 376, I.P.C. and sentenced the accused for the imprisonment already undergone for both the offences and further punished them with a fine of Rs. 2,000 under Section 452, I.P.C. and Rs. 3,000 under Section 376, I.P.C. The accused revisionists filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed. Conviction was upheld. The sentence awarded under Section 452, I.P.C. was also upheld but the sentence awarded under Section 376, I.P.C. was modified to the extent that the accused appellants were sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment instead of sentence already undergone. It is against this judgment, these two revisions have been filed.
(3.) THE revisionists have also challenged both the judgments of the two courts below on two grounds. THE judgment of the Sessions Judge passed in appeal is challenged on the ground of jurisdiction of the Sessions Judge in enhancing the sentence under Section 376, I.P.C. THE judgment of conviction of the two courts below has been challenged on merit. This Court being court of revision, will not interfere in the finding of facts recorded by the two courts below on the merit of case. The two courts below have recorded the finding of conviction under Sections 452 and 376, I.P.C. and these findings are in accordance with the evidence available on record. No illegality has been committed. Therefore, the contentions raised on the merit of the case is rejected.;