Joymalya Bagchi, J. - (1.) Both the above appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 08.09.2011/09.09.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Suri, Birbhum, convicting the appellants and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code and with a direction that both the sentences will run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellants is to the effect that P.W. 1, a wholesale grocery trader of Sainthia, was returning to Sainthia on 28.06.2006 on his motor bike along with cash of Rs.2 lacs, which he had collected from businessmen dealing with him. At about 4.15, when he reached near Rangaipur More near Rangaipur village, he found 3/4 persons standing with rope stretched across the road obstructing the path of his motor bike. As a result, P.W. 1 could not control the motor bike and fell down from the motor bike on the spot. One of the miscreants threatened him with a revolver and they snatched away the bag from his shoulder containing the cash and fled away with his motor bike towards Purandarpur. He cried for help but nobody came to his rescue. After returning to Santhia, he lodged a complaint, which was written by his cousin, Pankaj Parekh, P.W. 2, at Santhia Police Station and on the basis of the said written complaint, Santhia P.S. Case No. 43 dated 28.06.2006 under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code was started. In the course of investigation, the appellants were arrested and put up for Test Identification Parade. Although he identified Abdul Salam in the course of Test Identification Parade but failed to identify the other accused persons. It is alleged that the stolen money was also recovered from the possession of the accused persons and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellants Sk. Nabi, Abdul Salam, Sk. Salam, Sk. Hamai @ Sk. Makshed Ali and Sk. Nur under Sections 395/412 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and subsequently, transferred to the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Suri, Birbhum for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Sections 395/412 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons. The contents of the charge have been read over and explained to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 13 witnesses and exhibited number of documents. It is pertinent to note that the P.W. 1 was unable to identify the accused persons in Court in the course of trial.;