AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pritinker Diwaker, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.05.1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 294/1987 convicting the accused/appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 395/397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 21.6.1987 FIR (Ex. P-3) was lodged by Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2) alleging that on that day when he along with his elder brother - Khomilal (PW-3) was going to Bhuigaon on a motorcycle for selling the ornaments, near Kursinala they were stopped by seven persons who had blocked the road and were carrying country made pistol, grenade, Gandasa and club. Further case of the prosecution is that after exploding the grenade they started throwing stones as a result of which both Nand Kishore Soni and Khomilal sustained injuries. Thereafter, it is alleged that the accused persons committed dacoity and looted silver and gold ornaments worth Rs. 67,000. On the basis of the FIR, police started investigation and made recovery of the looted articles. Vide Ex. P-5 one damaged Rajdoot motorcycle and its parts were seized at the instance of the complainant. Thereafter, Nand Kishore and Khomilal were medically examined by Dr. Ram Krishna Jotpure (PW-1) who found injuries on their body. Vide Ex. P-6 a bag containing blood stains was seized. Vide Ex. P-7 remains of the bomb and parts of the motorcycle were seized. Vide Ex. P-8 blood stained soil was seized. On the basis of memorandum of Ramanuj (Ex. P-9), gold and silver ornaments were seized vide Ex. P-10. On the basis of memorandum of Chhayaram (Ex. P-11), gold and silver ornaments were seized vide Ex. P-12. On the basis of memorandum of Maniram (Ex. P-13) certain ornaments and one knife were seized vide Ex. P-14. On the basis of memorandum of Pyarelal (Ex. P-15) gold and silver ornaments were seized vide Ex. P-16. On the basis of memorandum of Hansram (Ex. P-17) gold and silver ornaments were seized vide Ex. P-18. On the basis of memorandum of Prahlad (Ex. P-19) gold and silver ornaments and one country made pistol were seized vide Ex. P-20. On the basis of memorandum of Pyarelal (Ex. P-21) one Hero cycle was seized vide Ex. P-22, one RMI cycle was seized vide Ex. P-23, one Hercules cycle was seized vide Ex. P-24, certificate of the jeweler was seized vide Ex. P-25. The seized articles were identified vide identification memo Ex. P-26. Vide Ex. P-27 a tin box was seized, vide Ex. P-28 one Godrej lock was seized and vide Ex. P-29 a tin box was seized from near the canal. Vide Ex. P-4, Test Identification Parade was conducted on 3.8.1987 and except Pyarelal all the accused persons were identified. FSL report Ex. P-32 shows that the parts of the motorcycle belonging to the complainant contained the residues of explosive substances.
So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, prosecution has examined 08 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded u/s 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in they denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case.
After hearing the parties the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused / appellants for the offence as mentioned above. During the pendency of the appeal it is reported that accused/appellant Pyarelal expired on 1.3.2001.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the judgment impugned.
Counsel for the accused/appellants submits that the Court below has erred in law in convicting the accused/appellants despite the fact that the articles seized were not used by them in the incident. He submits that there is no report of the Ballistic Expert showing that the country made pistol was in working condition and therefore according to him, the impugned judgment is bad and liable to be set aside.
On the other hand counsel for the respondent/State supports the impugned judgment.
From the evidence of Dr. Ram Krishna Jotpure (PW-1) who has examined the complainant namely Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2) and Khomilal (PW-3), it is clear that both of them had received injuries. Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2) has categorically stated as to the manner in which the offence was committed. This witness has further stated that all the seized articles have been duly identified by him. According to this witness, he had identified the accused/appellants as the persons involved in the crime in question. Khomilal (PW-3) has also stated almost the similar things as are stated by Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2). Revalal Devangan, Naib Tehsildar (PW-4) who conducted the test identification parade has stated that all the accused persons have been duly identified by Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2) and Khomilal (PW-3). Shivcharan (PW-6) has proved the identification of the ornaments so seized. K.K. Mishra, Sub Inspector (PW- 8) who had investigated the matter has also supported the entire case of the prosecution.
Thus it is clear from the evidence available on record that the articles seized by the prosecution have been duly identified by the complainant Nand Kishore Soni (PW-2) and Khomilal (PW-3). The accused/appellants have also been identified by them as the persons involved in the crime in question. Moreover, one country made pistol and knife were also seized from the spot. Pistol so seized was in working condition or not, is not a relevant factor in this case because unless it is used in the commission of an offence, report of the ballistic expert to the effect whether it was in working condition, would be of no consequence. Coming across the entire material available on record including the evidence of the witnesses, this Court is of the considered opinion that the conviction and sentence awarded to the accused/appellants is strictly in accordance with law and therefore the judgment impugned deserves to be maintained.
Consequently, the appeal being without substance is liable to be dismissed. It is here dismissed.