- (1.) The accused appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated June 26,2006 passed in Sessions Case No. 16/2006 (5/2006) of Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hindauncity (Distt. Karauli (Raj.) convicted and sentenced the accused appellants for the offence under Section 307, IPC to undergo 7 years RI and fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment of six months.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on October 21, 2005 on receiving an information from informant CI Ramchandra Singh along with other police officials went towards village Sarup ka Beda, and on seeing the police officials in uniform two miscreants having deadly weapon on a motor cycle without number plate took turn on Kachha Road Bhopar ki Kothi. The police officials with Ramchandra CI, told that Motor Cycle is driven by Dacoit Bhairon Singh and pillion driver is Ramraj. They went towards the motor cycle and it was found that Dacoit Bhairon Singh was having a Pistol and live cartridges with him. On giving alarm, Ramraj who was seating on pillion seat of the motor cycle fired at Police Party in order to kill them. Ramchandra CI also fired at the miscreants but the bullet did not hit them. On seeing the other police party surrounded by them from opposite direction, they tried to ran away from the place but the police officials caught them. On arresting the miscreants disclosed their names to be Bhairon Singh and Ramraj. From their possession one 315 Bore Rifle and 25 live cartridges and one Country made pistol of 315 Bore and one empty cartridge were recovered. The accused appellants were not having any licence to keep the fire arms. On this the police registered a case under Sections 307,353, 34, IPC and 3/25 of the Arms Act. After investigation the police filed challan against the accused appellants and the case was committed to the Court of Session where from it was transferred to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hindaun City, Distt. Karauli. The trial Court framed charge under Sections 307, 353 and 3/25 Arms Act. The accused appellants denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case produced 10 witnesses and exhibited 8 documents. The statements of the accused under Section 313, Cr. P. C. were recorded and in their statements they stated that they surrendered before the Police Station Nadoti but have been falsely implicated in the case. After hearing arguments the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as mentioned above vide judgment dated June 26, 2006.
(3.) The learned counsel for the accused appellants argued that the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court is legally not sustainable being contrary to the provisions of law as also the material obtaining on the record. The trial Court has not properly considered the fact that all the prosecution witnesses are police persons and not a single independent witness was produced by the prosecution. All the prosecution witnesses categorically stated that not a single person has sustained injuries either on his person or on their jeep, even then the trial Court passed the order of conviction and sentence. The trial Court had not properly considered the fact that no person has sustained injuries on his person then how the appellants can be convicted for the offence under Section 307, IPC. The judgment of sentence passed by the trial Court is highly excessive and unreasonable which deserves to be modified.;