Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. P. K. Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.
(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 19-4-2005 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Godda in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2005, whereby and whereunder the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned 2nd Assistant Sessions Judge, Godda in G.R. Case No. 245 of 1998, corresponding to S.T. No. 218/1998/04/1998 convicting the petitioners for the offences punishable u/Ss. 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to R.I. for six years has been affirmed.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the manner of identification and the source of light have not been disclosed by the prosecution. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that it would be virtually improbable for the accused persons not to have covered their faces if at all they were known to the informant prior to the date of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the witnesses who were examined on behalf of the prosecution are all family members. It has been submitted that the Test Identification Parade held by the Investigating Officer and the Circle Officer for identification of the articles recovered were not in accordance with law. Learned counsel thus submits that since the identification of the petitioners itself is doubtful the petitioners deserves acquittal from criminal prosecution.;