RAJESH Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJESH is aggrieved by a judgment dated 28.09.2011 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 05/11 arising out of FIR No. 281/07 PS Timar Pur by which he was convicted under Section 392 IPC read with Section 397 IPC. By an order dated 28.09.2011, he was awarded RI for seven years with fine Rs. 5,000/ - under Section 397 IPC and RI for four years with fine Rs. 5,000/ - under Section 392 IPC. The substantive sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) ALLEGATIONS against the appellant were that on the night intervening 19/20.05.2007 at outer ring road, Majnu Ka Tilla, he committed robbery and deprived complainant ­ Ms. Bhanu of her two CRL.A.No. 1510/2011 Page 1 of 5 mobile phones, laptop, purse, cash Rs. 5,000/ -, ATM and credit cards of different banks, Titan wrist watch and gold chain with pendent when she was travelling alone in the TSR No. DL -1RE -3245 being driven by the appellant. Daily Diary (DD) No. 5A (Ex.PW -4/B) was recorded at 02.20 A.M. regarding the incident. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report after recording complainant's statement in the morning on 20.05.2007. During investigation, it revealed that the TSR No. DL -1RE -3245 was in possession of the appellant at the relevant time. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The appellant declined to participate in the Test Identification Proceedings. Some robbed articles and knife was recovered from his possession. After completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the appellant; he was duly charged and brought to trial. In 313 statement, the accused pleaded false implication and alleged that the complainant and her boyfriend Prashant were under the influence of liquor and had declined to pay the fare. No evidence in defence was led. The trial resulted in his conviction as aforesaid.

(3.) THE minimum term of imprisonment prescribed under Section 397 IPC is only seven years. Apparently, it does not regulate sentence of fine. In the instant case, once the Trial Court had imposed fine under Section 392 IPC, imposition of additional fine of Rs. 5,000/ - under Section 397 IPC was not permissible and sustainable. Accordingly, fine imposed under Section 397 IPC is set aside. Other terms and conditions of the sentence order are left undisturbed.