Vinod Prasad - (1.) -Revisionist Saudan Singh was tried in Case No. 290 of 2003 by Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj, district Etah in case State v. Saudan Singh and others under Sections 380 and 411, I.P.C., P.S. Sahawar, district Etah vide Crime No. 71 of 1995.
(2.) THE allegations against the revisionist accused were that on the intervening night between 22/23.5.1995, informant Kunwar Pal was sleeping alongwith his family, when at 12.30 a.m. his table fan was found missing. Dhanpal Singh, the brother of Kunwar Pal, raised hue and cry that thieves have stolen the aforesaid table fan. THE informant, his brother and the co-villagers Shaitan Singh, Kallu chased the thieves and one of the thieves Saudan Singh (the present revisionist) was caught by them at 12.45 in night. From possession of the applicant a Parat (big plate) belonging to Dhanpal brother of the informant was recovered. Saudan Singh (present revisionist) after being apprehended named Som Datt and Mahipal as his companions who had fled away with table fan belonging to the informant. THE informant lodged the F.I.R. of the said incident, which culminated into charge-sheet under Section 380/411, I.P.C. In the trial court prosecution examined the informant Kunwar Pal as P.W. 1, Dhan Pal as P.W. 2, Kallu P.W. 3, Sub-Inspector Sukhveer Singh P.W. 4 and H. C. P. Giridhari Singh P.W. 5. The F.I.R., recovery memo, site plan G.D., medical reports of the revisionist Saudan Singh and the charge-sheet were proved as exhibits. The defence of the revisionist under Section 313, Cr. P.C. was that of denial and, he did not lead any defence evidence.
(3.) THE trial court on the basis of the evidence led before it came to the conclusion that the prosecution has successfully brought home the guilt of the revisionist accused who deserves to be convicted and consequently it convicted the revisionist under Section 380/411, I.P.C. and sentenced him to two years simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of payment of fine one month further simple imprisonment on the first count and six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200 and in default of payment of fine 15 days further simple imprisonment on the second count vide its order dated 30.9.2005. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentences revisionist preferred an appeal, which was numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 24/05, Saudan Singh v. State of U. P., which was heard and dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act Etah vide his impugned order dated 4.8.2006. The lower appellate court though maintained the conviction of the revisionist but had altered the sentence of the revisionist under Section 380, I.P.C. and sentenced him to one year R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The trial court also altered the sentences under Section 411, I.P.C. to three months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 200 and in default of payment of fine to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment. The lower appellate court further ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.;