GOVERDHAN BARDHAR,J. - (1.) Appellants have filed this appeal challenging the impugned judgment/order dated 27.9.2017 whereby they were convicted and sentenced as under:-
(2.) U/s. 395 IPC: Rigorous imprisonment for ten years, to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- each and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. U/s. 397 IPC: Imprisonment for life, to pay a fine of Rs.10000/- each and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 8.10.2000 at about 8.00 PM complainant Yogesh Kumar Vijay alongwith his wife and two sons were taking meals at their residence. 4/5 persons armed with weapons entered their house and tied their hands and feet and made them sit in a room. The said accused threatened them at gun point and by pointing knife that they were to stay in the house during the night and would leave the house before 5.00 AM. Accused told them that they had just committed a murder. Thereafter, the accused demanded jewelry and cash from the complainant and they collected costly articles from their house and left at 5.00 AM on 9.10.2000. After breaking the door, complainant came out of the room at about 6.30 AM and found that their Car and Scooter were missing. Complainant also supplied the list of stolen articles from his house.
(3.) On the basis of report Exhibit-P.1 lodged by the complainant, formal FIR Exhibit-P.8 bearing No.240 dated 9.10.2000 was recorded at Police Station Shipra Path, Jaipur under Sections 395, 397 IPC. After completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against co-accused Manoj Kumar. So far as present appellants are concerned, investigation qua them was kept pending. Accused Manoj Kumar was convicted and sentenced by the trial court vide judgment/order dated 17.12.2002 under Sections 395, 397 IPC. In an appeal filed by co-accused Manoj Kumar before this court, his conviction, as ordered by the trial court, was maintained vide order dated 3.4.2006 (certified copy placed on record by the learned counsel for the appellants) and his sentence was reduced from imprisonment for life to rigorous imprisonment for ten years.;