Kanchan Chakraborty, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.5.2010 passed by the Ld. Additional District & Sessions Judge ,FT court no-3 at Sealdah in S.T. no-3(7) of 2008 arising out of Beniapukur P.S. Police Station case no- 159 dated 28.5.2008 thereby convicting the appellant Sk . Raju @ Lala under sections 395,397& 412 of Indian Penal Code read with section 34 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine and further seven years for committing offence under section 412 Indian Penal Code with fine .
(2.) Being dissatisfied with and aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence , the judgment is assailed on the following grounds:- [ a] that the Ld. trial judge failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its proper and true perspective; [ b] that the Ld. court framed the charges wrongly and improperly & thereby caused prejudiced to the appellant; . [ c] that the Ld. court failed to consider that seizure was not supported by independent witness; [d] that evidence of important witnesses was withheld by the prosecution; [ e] that the ld. ought to have considered that the accused persons made a specific case that they were shown to the witnesses before holding of Test identification parade; [ f] that the court erred in accepting the statement of the accused under section-27 of the Evidence Act ; [ g ] that the court failed to take note of the contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses on material points ; [ h ] that the judgment being otherwise bad in law, is liable to be set aside. The prosecution case before the court, succinctly, was that on 28.5.2008 at about o1.25 hr. while Melvyn Gomes was walking along the A.J.C.Bose road flyover , he noticed a Tata Indigo car stopped by the side of the road after crossing him from behind. Thinking that it would possibly be a shuttle car and stopped to pick up passenger like him, Melvyn asked the driver as to whether he would go towards Ruby . The driver agreed. Menvyn approached the rear seat of the car and found some persons in the rear seat and another person sitting by the side of the driver. Melvyn was given room in the rear seat between the persons already sitting there. When the car reached the seven-point crossing of park circus , the volume of the tape recorder was raised and the car turned towards the Sundari Mohan Avenue instead of bridge no-4. Melvyn asked the driver to stop the car but, the person sitting by his side took out a razor , held that in front of his face and told him to hand over whatever he was having with him and threatened him with dire consequences. The person who was sitting on the other side of Melvyn , in the meantime ,brought out Melvyns' moneybag. Melvyn had to hand over his mobile phone to him out of fear. When the car crossed the Merina hotel and stopped at an isolated place, Melvyn was asked to get down . Melvyn got down from the car and the car sped of quickly. Melvyn , however , noticed that the number of the car was WB-2K -0281. Melvyn somehow retuned back home by a taxi. The moneybag which was taken away by the miscreant was containing about Rs. 150,one H.S.B.C.credit card,one ICICI debit cum ATM card,driving licence & some papers. The mobile phone was a Nokia model no. 2760 bearing connection no. 9830931386 & I.M.E.I.no 353116021083537.
(3.) The investigation of the case ended in a charge sheet. The appellant Sk.Razu and three others were arrayed to face the charges under sections- 395 & 397 0f I.P.C. while the appellant Sk. Razu was also charged for committing offence under section-412 of the I.P.C. All of them denied the charges and were tried by the Ld. Court . Sk.Razu and other three accused were found guilty of offences under sections-395 &397 of I.P.C. while Sk.Razu was also found guilty of offence under section 412 of I.P.C. by the Ld. trial court. Hence, this appeal. .;