HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. S -964 - SB of 1999 and Criminal Revision No. 299 of 2001 as the common question of law and facts arises for consideration. For brevity, the facts are being taken from Criminal Appeal No. S -964 -SB of 1999. Present appeal is directed against the order of conviction dated 1.10.1999 convicting the nine appellants for the offences under Sections 436 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing them to undergo a rigorous imprisonment of four years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - each under Sections 149 and 436 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, appellants were directed to suffer three months rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Appellant submitted that appellant No. 3, Madan Lal son of Prem Chand and appellant No. 9, Radhey Sham son of Audhalal have died. During the pendency of the appeal, such fact is not disputed by the Learned DAG, Haryana. In view of the said fact, the appeal filed by appellants No. 3 and 9 stand abated. As many as 18 accused were made to stand trial for the offences under Sections 436, 395, 148 and 149 of IPC pursuant to lodging of FIR No. 167 dated 4.4.1996 Ex. PA/2. The background leading to lodging of FIR is that on 3.4.1996 at about 9.00 p.m., one Hemant son of Balaki was murdered. The parents of the deceased suspected that four sons of Bhagwan Dass committed the murder of their son -Hemant. The parents of the deceased and their supporters started taking out a procession in the morning of 4.4.1996 at about 1.30 p.m. At that time, the complainant was present in his house. An information was received that processionists were planning to set the house of the complainant i.e. Bhagwan Dass on fire. Bhagwan Dass -complainant accompanied by his brother Gobind and PW -6 Subhash started going towards his shop of jewellery to get the same protected from the processionists. But the complainant saw the present appellants from a distance setting his shop on fire after breaking upon the shutter of the shop. The manner of occurrence was seen by Bhagwan Dass and two other persons, one of them has been examined by the prosecution as PW6. The witnesses saw the shop having been actually set on fire by the accused -present appellants which led to trial of 18 persons before the learned trial Court.
(3.) APPELLANTS and other nine accused were charged for the offences under Section 148 and 395 read with Sections 149 of IPC and under Sections 148 and 436 read with Section 149 of IPC. Apart from the formal witnesses prosecution examined PW -5 - Bhagwan Dass; PW -6 - Subhash and PW -7 Ramesh Kumar son of Bhagwan Dass. The learned trail Court after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, keeping in view the allegations in FIR Ex. PA/2, convicted the present appellants. The reasoning given by the learned trial Court is that though all the accused have been made to stand trial but the names of appellants were disclosed in the FIR, the first version. Learned trial Court also found that the offence under Section 395 IPC is not made out from the evidence on record.;