Arvind Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) Since all the aforesaid three Criminal Appeals arise out of the same and one judgment and order dated 23.12.2006 of conviction/acquittal, passed in relation to the five concerned consolidated sessions trials arising out of case crime nos. 211 of 2003 and 212 of 2003, whereby the learned trial Judge has convicted the three accused persons namely Lalit, Bimal and Jagvir under various sections of IPC and Arms Act while acquitting Ram Prakash Sharma of charges under Section 201 IPC and 27/30 Arms Act, as such the same are being heard and disposed of by common order.
(2.) By way of aforesaid Criminal Appeals challenge has been made to the judgment and order of conviction (In re: Accused Lalit, Bimal and Ranvir) and Acquittal (In re: Accused Ram Prakash Sharma) dated 23.12.2006 arisng out of Case Crime Number 211 of 2003 and 212 of 2003, respectively, under Sections 302, 302/34, 323 and 336 IPC and Sections 25(1)/30 Arms Act (In re: Accused Lalit); and order of acquittal under Section 201 IPC and 27/30 Arms Act (In re: Accused Ram Prakash Sharma) passed in concerned five consolidated sessions trials numbers 826 of 2003 State v. Lalit , 827 of 2003 State v. Lalit , 828 of 2003 State v. Ranvir and Vimal , 829 of 2003 State v. Ram Prakash Sharma and 455 of 2005 State v. Ram Prakash Sharma , arising out of aforesaid case crime numbers concerning police station Tajganj, District Agra, whereby the aforesaid appellants- Ranvir, Vimal and Lalit- have been sentenced under Sections 302/34 IPC and 302 IPC, respectively with imprisonment for life coupled with fine Rs. 10,000/- in the event of default the concerned convict would have to suffer additional imprisonment for two years, under Section 323 IPC each of the aforesaid convict shall suffer six months imprisonment coupled with fine Rs. 200/- default stipulates one month additional imprisonment; under Section 336 IPC each of the convict shall have to suffer one month imprisonment and accused Lalit has been further sentenced to three years imprisonment coupled with fine Rs. 2000/- and in the event of default he will have to suffer additional imprisonment for three months under Section 25(1) the Arms Act and further convict accused Lalit has been sentenced to two months imprisonment under Section 30 Arms Act.
(3.) In so far as aforesaid Government Appeal No.3026 of 2007 is concerned, the same has been preferred by the State against the aforesaid judgment and order dated 23rd December, 2006 (in so far as the order relates to acquittal of Ram Prakash Sharma in relation to charges under Sections 201 IPC Section 27/30 Arms Act) passed by the trial court in consolidated Sessions Trial No. 829 of 2003 (State v. Ram Prakash S/o Atar Singh) and Sessions Trial No.455 of 2005 arising out of Case Crime No. 212 of 2003 and Case Crime No. 211 of 2003, respectively, whereby, the learned trial court has acquitted accused-respondent Ram Prakash of charges under Sections 201 IPC and 27/30 Arms Act.;