..^pr" HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR APPELLANT: RESPONDENT: iaw»^f-f APPELLANT: RESPONDENT: Criminal Appeal No.565 of 2006 Munna Gupta Versus State of Chhattisgarh AND Criminal Appeal No.431 of 2007 Rgmpravesh Chaudhury Versus State of Chhattisgarh Post for Dronouncement of iudament on 3rd Auaust, 2QO& Sd/" T.P.Sharma Judge ,^:'&tw HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: Criminal Appeal No.565 of 2006 Munna Gupta, S/o Hari Prasad Gupta, aged 35 years, R/o Village Dirrila, Police Station Sadar, Jeypore, Distt. Koraput (Orissa) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Nagarnar, Tahsil Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar. AND Criminal ADpeal No.431 of 2007 Rampravesh Chaudhury, S/o Faguni Chaudhury, aged about 40 years, R/o Jeevan Beegha, PS Jamhor, - Distt. Aurangabad (Bihar) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Nagarnar, Tahsil Jagadalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) {Criminal appeals under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973} !1/ :i- r -o Present: Mr. M.K. Baeg, counsel for the appellant in Cr.A.No.565/2006. Mr, S.C. Verma, counsel for the appellant in Cr.A.No.431/2007. Mr. Akhil Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. ^ ^ • . . - Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, 3 JUDGMENT (Delivered on 3rd August, 2009) 1. Cr.A.No.565/2006 (jail appeal) filed by Munna Gupta and Cr.A. No.431/2007 filed by Rampravesh Chaudhury have been preferred against the common judgment dated 12-7-2006 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Jagda.l.pur, in Sessions Trial No.202/2005, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. By the aforesaid judgment of conviction & order of sentence, learned Additional Sessions Judge after holding t'ne accused/appellants guilty for commission of offehce under Sections 395 & 397 ofthe I.P.C., sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten ^ >/^fc "€ years & pay fine of Rs.300/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months & to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, respectively. 3. Judgment of conviction & order, of sentence is challenged on the ground that without any iota of evidence, learned Court below has convicted & sentenced the appellanj:s in the aforesaid manner. 4. I have heard learned counsel fpr the parties and perused the impugned judgment as also the record of the trial Court. 5. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28-1-2004 one A. Krishna Rao (PW-2) wascoming from Jeypore, 'Orissa to Raipur by the bus of Manish Bus Travels (Payal Bus) NO.CG-07/E-0727 along with other passengers, at about 10.30-p.m. when the bus was crossing near Dhanpunji barrier, one persdhsittihg inside the bus reached near the bus driver and on the point of pistol, he compelled the bus driver to stop the bus, two persons were standing near the gate, three other persons were holding Kukri & country made pistol, they threatened the passengers and assaulted them. The accused persons also assaulted the conductor and caused serious injuryover his head and snatched the money which the conductor was having. They also assaulted A. Krishna Rao (PW-2) by country made pistol and snatched Rs.3,000/-, one gold ring of Rs.1,500/-, and also snatched one mobile phone, Rs.7,000/- & one ring from his nephew. The accused persons also snatched money & articles from the passengers sitting in the bus. Some a'ccused persons fled away from the bus, they were speaking Hindi language in Bihari tone, Finally the accused persons fled away from the spot. A. Krishna Rao (PW-2) immediately went to Jagdalpur in the same bus and lodged the report vide Ex.P-8. Spot map was prepared vide Ex.P-10. Injured Dinesh Prasad & Krishna Rao were examined by the doctor vide Exs.P-11 & P-12, respectively. Police party proceeded for search of the accused persons to Jeypore, Orissa & gihar after recording Roznamcha Exs.P-28 & P-30. Accused Munna Gupta was found in Village Dimla, State ofOrissa. He was taken into custody. He made discloser statement of Rs.4,600/-, revolver & one watch vide Ex.P-1 and-the same were recovered from him vide Ex.P-2. Accused Ram Pravesh was found in Distt. Aurangabad, State of Bihar. He was also "tgken into custody. He made disclosure statement of Rs.8,500/- & ^^••••:'y- country made pistol vide Ex.P-18, money was recovered from him vide Ex.P-19 and country made pistol was recovered vide Ex.P-4. Suit case containing clothes & Rs.1,800/- was recovered near the spot vide Ex.P-3. Arms were sentfor examination. Clothes & suit case were identified ,vide Ex.P-6. Identification parade was conducted inside thejail and the accused/appellants were identified by A. Krishna Rao, K. Sudhakar Rao & Suresh Nair vide Ex.P-9. One register was recovered from Hotel Santoshi, Main Road, Nabarangpur (Orissa) vide Ex.P-13, copy of the entries is Ex.P-14 in which name of J.K. Singh was mentioned as customer. Sfatements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 ofthe Cr.P.C. 6. After completion of investigattbn, charge sheet was filed against ten accused persons before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jagdalpurwho in turn committed the case to the Courtof Sessions, Jagdalpur, from where learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Jagdalpur received the case on transfer for trial. Out of the ten accused persons two were in custody and rest were absconding. 7. In order to prove the guilt of the appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as nineteen witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which they have denied the circumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence and false implication. 8. After affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted & sentenced the appellants as aforementioned. 9. In this case, learned counsel for the appellants have not disputed the conviction of the appellants and only arguedon the questionof sentence. They submit that the sentences awarded to the accused/ appellants are excessive and disproportionate to the gravity of offence. 10.0n the other hand, learned counsel a^earing on behalfofthe State/ respondent supported the impugned judgment. ll.In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, I have examined the evidence available on record. Commission of dacoity •by the present two appellants is not disputed by counsel for the appellants, otherwise established by the evidence of Hafiz Ahmed ggpnf euiAei|S"d'.l -/PS •spise las Aqsjsq si •3-d'I 3L|ijo ^6£uoi}3as jspun siue||adde 344 uodn pssodLU! SJB9A USASS JQJ •ry jo ssusiuss siejedss 'SMIUOLU saji^i JQJ •fa o6japun jsqijnj 01 suy jo ^usuiAed jo iinejsp ui 'Lioes -/oos'sy 'jo suy Aed igsjesA usi JQJ •ry oBjapun 0} P33U91U3S pUG ''3'd'I SMI JQ ^6£ ''8 S6£ suoiiass JSpun UOJISIAUOD ^uspusdspui jo pesisu! ''3"d'I 341 jo ^6£ uoR3as MIIM pesj S6£ uoj439S japun p9i3!Auo3 sje siue||sdde sqi •p3Mo||B Ai^jed si lesdde 3L)i 'Aiiieoiuqosi jo punoj6 sqi uo 'suosgsj 6uio63joj sqiJOj'frT •AyieduiAs Aue SAjssap ;ou op siue||3dde aq^ 'sj36u3ssed lusjsjjipoi Ajn.Cui pue. A^iosep snq ^o l3ej 9L<1 UO!}ej3p!SU03 0}U! 6U!>|G4 'S3US1U3S ^O UORSSnb 341 spjeBsj sv'ET •Mei 9L|4 japun 9[qBU]e}sns iou ajo SSDUSIUSS 13 uoiisiAuosqons '3'd'I 941 jo /C6£ 18 S6£ SU0143SS jspun A|aiejedss siue||3dde sqi psousiuss 13 PSIOIAUOS SGL| 36pn[- SUOISS3S |eUOjl!ppV p3UJ931 •S-iesA USAaS JO 33U34U3S lunujiuiLU sspiAOJd L)3iqM A;io3ep jo iujojeA!ieJ3669X9 ues! inq '33U3jj03A!iu9isqns40u s; "3'd'IsMUO Z.6£ uoiisas Jspun siqeqsiund 33U3JJO 'A1103BP 944 pSUILULUOO SABq Asqi suodesM Aipesp jo ssn Aq pue suodesM Aipesp wiv^ p3iuj9 BJSM siue||sdde lussajd sqi Aiiooep jo UOISSILULU03 jo aLUi^ 941 49 pue Avosep ^o sousjjo SL|} pauiLuujOD peq suosjad pssnDDB JSLJIO q4!M 6uo|e s}ue||9dde OMI 9ssq4 ieif4 ssua-is^ui BuiMeJp joj lusiDyjnssi uoiinoasojd 3L|;jo jieLjsq uo pesnppe ssuapiAg,-M9| 341 jspun siqeuie^sns SOUSplAS 9|qip3J3 Ig 6UIL|3U!|3 UO p3i§eq si suodesM Aipesp Buisn Aq All039p JO UOISSILULU03 JOj siueiisdde OM; 33341 jo uoipiAUO^-ZT •suosjad p3sn33Bjeq40 44jM.6uo|e [O^sid speuj Aj^unoa JO lUIOd 3L|} UO AljODBp psiijLUUJOO peq OL|M pssnose oqi SJB suosjsd OM} asaqi leqi SMOL|S L|3iL|M 6-d'xg OLUSLU uoiieoyiiuap! pue suosjad pSSnOOe 3L|1 LUOJJ S3|314JB JO AJ3A033J Ig S4U3LU9ie4S J3SO|3Slp 'g-d'XS •y'l'd '(6T-Md) nyes |B|!qeq3 '(81-Md) |3L|6eg ue4>]3-| '(si-Md) J!BN eJpU3jns'(frT-Md) |34Bd •g-N '(£T-Md)oddoi soo>|uer '(zT-/V\d) uos •~r»'(OT-Md) (U!BC) eiqias eussAejd '(z.-Md) urerjeujn^ ueMBd '(9-Md) Aapued fe>|ued '(s-Md) Agpuej •S '-ia '(fr-Md) JBpjes jeujn» 4S01UGN '(E-Md) JB>|e4pns •» '(Z-Md) oey euqsu» •v '(T-Md) t' ^^ iew/sw i?Sf!i^ii- ,.4.'E.£i^%-.. ^f ;'-^ •"-^i^ 'tl,, v^ :3<i&T;'