AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 262 wordsJoymalya Bagchi, J
The appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 395/397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-,in default to suffer imprisonment for two months more.
It is alleged that a dacoity was committed in the shop of one Pradip Kumar Dutta (P.W.3) on 10.11.97 at around 8:25 PM and the miscreants by
brandishing a revolver had taken away cash to the tune of Rs.1,18,727/-, various electronic articles and gold ornaments from the shop. In course of
investigation, some of the stolen articles were recovered. The appellant and other accused persons were identified in course of test identification
parade.
From the evidence on record, it appears that the appellant had been identified in course of test identification parade as well as in court. Stolen articles
have also been recovered from the accused persons and evidence of prosecution witnesses are reliable and remained unshaken in cross-examination.
Hence, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Copy of the judgment be sent down to the trial court at once.
Period of detention suffered by the appellant during investigation, enquiry and trial shall be set off from the substantive sentence imposed upon him in
terms of 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He is directed to surrender forthwith to serve out the sentence.
Urgent Photostat Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.