Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) - "The darkness came on roll, The serpents stirred their hoods, Terrorised are the streets, Roaming unabashed are, The swindlers and bandits." Facts of this case depict this scenario. On October 20, 2001 Mathura Road was terrorised in broad day light. However bandits, appellants herein, were nabbed immediately after the incident. Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bharatpur convicted and sentenced them vide judgment dated January 27, 2003 as under- Rana & Bittu @ Ravi, Pawan Kumar and Sanjay @ Sanjeev : U/s. 302 IPC: Each to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer, simple imprisonment for two months.U/s. 394 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. U/s. 397 IPC: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. U/s. 3/25 Arms Act: Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Ram Charan: U/s. 379 IPC: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 1000/-. Substantive Sentences, were ordered to run concurrently. FACTS:
(2.) The prosecution case in nutshell is as follows- On October 20, 2001 around 10.30 AM a telephonic message was received at Police Station Udyog Nagar Bharatpur to the effect that some miscreants who were sitting in white Maruti van fired shots at two motorcyclists near Ludhwara turn at Mathura road. The miscreants robbed money and ran away towards Bharatpur. The information was entered in Rojnamcha Aam (Ex. P-56) and SHO PS Bharatpur rushed to the spot with police squad. At 12.15 PM on the said day informant Satish (Pw.1) handed over a written report (Ex. P-10) to the SHO at Ludhwara Road itself. It was interalia stated in the report that the informant who was employee of HB Petrol Pump Mathura Road Bharatpur accompanied by Ranveer (since deceased), another employee, proceeded on motorcycle to the Bank along with the bag full of currency notes. Mahaveer was driving the motor cycle and informant was sitting on the rear seat. After the motor cycle had covered distance of 3 kilometers, one white Maruti car bearing No. HR-51 E/5604 came from behind. Four boys of 20-22 years of age were sitting in the car. As soon as the car came close to the motorcycle, the boys fired two shots from Kattas (country made gun) that hit Mahaveer (Ramveer?), as a result of which the motor cycle fell down. The car halted for a while and the boys snatched the money-bag, boarded the car and fled towards Bharatpur. Ranveer succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The informant then got lift on a scooter, reached the petrol pump and narrated the incident to Seth ji. On that report a case under - sections 302/394 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act was registered and investigation commenced. Autopsy on the dead body was performed, statements of witnesses under section 161 CrPC were recorded, necessary memos were drawn, the accused were arrested and they were identified as the miscreants in the Identification Parade. On completion of investigation charge sheet was filed and in due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1 Bharatpur. Charges under Sections 302, 394, 397 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act were framed against Sushil (absconded) Pawan, Rana and Sanjay whereas accused Rajveer was charged under Sections 302, 394, 397 read with 120B IPC and charge under Section 379. In the alternative Section 411 IPC was framed against accused Ram Charan. The accused denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 48 witnesses and got exhibited 120 documents. In the explanation under Section 313 CrPC, the accused claimed innocence. Two witnesses in defence were examined. Learned trial judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the accused as indicated herein above.
(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned public prosecutor and with their assistance scrutinised the material on record.;