C.M. Totla, J. - (1.) BOTH these revisions are preferred by same petitioner -challenged are convictions though in different cases for different offences but by the same Court and arguments raised are exactly same so and as stated by counsel for petitioner and also Public Prosecutor are being decided together. For decision these revisions, factual aspects of alleged incidents need not be described in detail. Narrowingly describing necessary and as seems relevant is that (A) in relation to FIR No. 406/02 registered for offences of Ss. 324, 325, 326 in wee hours of 20.12.02 for said incident of previous evening and chargesheet against appellant in January, 2003 resulted in registration of criminal case No. 18/03 and after trial vide judgment dated 30.06.05 petitioner Deep Singh was convicted and sentenced to different period of imprisonment running to two years six months and fine for the offence of Ss. 341, 323, 321, 325, 326 IPC. Sentence awarded was suspended by the Magisterial Court and learned Sessions Judge in preferred appeal No. 33/05 also ordered suspension (B) for FIR No. 410 registered on 23.02.02 for the offence of Section 3/25 Arms Act for the incident of same day, police report was submitted and in registered criminal Case No. 14/06, appellant was convicted vide judgment dated 05.04.2006 for the offence and sentenced to two years imprisonment with fine and this sentence also suspended by the trial court in Appeal No. 14/06 by the learned Sessions Judge.
(2.) IN both appeals, petitioner used to present on some dates but often absented himself and on applications, exemptions granted by learned Sessions Judge. At the request, adjournments were granted but appellant failed to present on February 1st, 2009 so warrant of arrest directed and arrest could not be effected was declared absconder on 31.03.2009. While declaring absconder in both appeals on 31.3.09, learned Sessions Judge also decided and dismissed both appeals observing that as appellant had not appeared and repeatedly, so seems that not interested for decision on merits so and for absence, appeal stands dismissed. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence were upheld.
(3.) CONSEQUENT to above order in appeal, learned Magistrate proceeded further and ultimately appellant presented himself before the Court on July 12th who imprisoned since then under both the sentences awarded.;