Udailal @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan

120B IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.10,000. In default of

payment of fine to undergo six months’ simple imprisonment.

341 IPC,"Simple imprisonment for one month with a fine of Rs.500. In default of payment of

fine to undergo three days’ simple imprisonment.

332 IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 3 years with a fine of Rs.1000. In default of payment of

fine to undergo three months’ simple imprisonment.

333 IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with a fine of Rs.3000. In default of payment of

fine to undergo three months’ simple imprisonment.

353 IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 2 years with a fine of Rs.2000. In default of payment

of fine to undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.

225 IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 2 years with a fine of Rs.1000. In default of payment of

fine to undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.

307/34 IPC,"Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.10000. In default of

payment of fine to undergo six months’ simple imprisonment.

3/25 of Arms

Act","Simple imprisonment for 2 years with a fine of Rs.1000. In default of payment of

fine to undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.

examining the evidence of prosecution witnesses and other evidence has rightly found the accused-appellants guilty for the aforesaid offences.,

 Now, adverting to the submission of learned counsel for the appellants for reducing the sentence, it may be observed that the learned trial Court,",

after scrutinizing the material available on record, has recorded a definite finding of guilt against appellants, therefore, I am not persuaded to interfere",

with the finding of fact recorded by the learned trial Court. Otherwise also, the learned counsel for appellants has conceded on the finding of guilt",

recorded against the accused-appellants. However, taking into account the concession made by learned counsel for the appellants and the significant",

fact that out of the maximum sentence of ten years awarded to the accused-appellants, by now appellants Udailal and Radheyshyam have already",

suffered imprisonment for more than six years and three months, in my opinion, in the backdrop of overall facts and circumstances of the case,",

reducing the sentence of the appellants to the period already undergone by them and ordering payment of fine amount to the victims would meet the,

ends of justice. Â,

The criminal appeal is, accordingly, partly allowed and while upholding the conviction of appellants, recorded by learned trial Court, the substantive",

sentences awarded to them are reduced to the period already undergone by them. The appellants are ordered to be released upon their depositing,

the amount of fine imposed by learned trial Court, which in the case of appellant Udailal comes to Rs.28,500 and in case of appellant Radheyshyam to",

Rs.12,000 respectively, if they are not required in any other case.Â",

The learned trial Court is further directed to pay the amount of fine, on realization, to the victims (injured) equally without any delay as compensation",

under Section 357 Cr.P.C.,