- (1.) By way of aforesaid two appeals both the aforesaid appellants have challenged the validity and sustainability of the judgment and order of the trial court dated 28.5.2012 passed by Special Judge, Bijnor in Session's Trial No. 562 of 2008, under Sections 363, 366, 376/511 and 376(2)(g) IPC Case Crime No. 2071 of 2006, Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Bijnor, whereby respondent nos. 3 to 7 have been acquitted of all charges and respondent No. 2 has been acquitted of charge under Sections 376(2)(g) (in Appeal No. 285/2012), and order of conviction (in Appeal No. 2436/2012) made against appellant Sonu @ Rahul under Sections 363, 366 IPC and sentenced to 5 years R.I. and 7 years R.I. coupled with fine Rs. 20,000/and Rs. 25,000/respectively with direction to realize the amount of fine as arrears of land revenue and 80% of the amount shall be given to the victim, besides directing that both the sentences shall run concurrently.
(2.) Since both the aforesaid appeals are connected and arise out of the same judgment and order dated 28.05.2012 passed by Special Judge, Bijnor in Sessions Trial No. 562 of 2008, therefore, the same are being disposed of by common judgment.
(3.) For the proper understanding the nature of both the aforesaid appeals, it can be observed that the aforesaid Appeal No. 285 of 2012 has been preferred by the informant Satyapal Singh against the accused respondent nos. 2 to 7 against the finding of acquittal recorded in relation to respondents under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)g and 376 read with Section 511 IPC, whereas Appeal No. 2436 of 2012 has been preferred by accused Sonu @ Rahul s/o Anand Kumar against his conviction under Sections 363, 366 IPC, whereby he has been sentenced to 5 years and 7 years R.I. coupled with fine of Rs. 20,000/and Rs. 25,000/, respectively and the amount of fine has been directed to be realized as arrears of land revenue.;