Full Text
Translation output
H
$-32 to 34 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.A. 1241/2012
CHHOTE LAL
Appellant
Through :Ms.Manujsha Wadhwa, Advocate.
$-32 to 34 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.A. 1241/2012
CHHOTE LAL
Appellant
Through :Ms.Manujsha Wadhwa, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE
Respondent
Through :Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.
Respondent
Through :Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State.
CRL.A. 1079/2012
SfflVAN YADAV @ VIKAS Appellant
Through : Mr.Anish Dhingra, Advocate.
SfflVAN YADAV @ VIKAS Appellant
Through : Mr.Anish Dhingra, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE
CRL.A. 536/2012
WAZID
Appellant
Through :Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate.
WAZID
Appellant
Through :Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE NCT OF DELHI
CrlA.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 &536/12 Page 1of5 2013:DHC:8334
CrlA.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 &536/12 Page 1of5 2013:DHC:8334
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
08.05.2013 The appellants challenge
08.05.2013 The appellants challenge
ORDER
dated 04.02.2012 in
Sessions Case No.52/2011 arising out of FIR No.263/2006 under Section
395/412/120B IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali by which appellant-
Chhote Lale was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years under Section 412 IPC with fine of ^10,000/-. The appellants-Shivan Yadav
@ Vikas and Wazid were sentenced to undergo RI for sevenyears with fine of ?10,000/- each under Section 395 IPC; RI for seven years each under
Section 397 IPC and RI for seven years each with fine of ?10,000/- each under Section 412 IPC vide order on sentence dated 09.02.2012.
Allegations against the appellants were that on or before
04.06.2006, they with their associates Javed @ Anwar@ Banars @ Ahmed
Raji Siddiqui, Deena Nath @ Deena and Harman conspired to commit dacoity at the office of Sukhbir Sharan Aggarwal at property No.1994, Katra Lachu Singh, Chandni Chowk, Delhi and on 04.06.2006 at about 3.15 p.m., they committed dacoity at the office of the complainant- Sukhbir
Sharan Aggarwal using deadly weapons. On 16.07.2006 Abdul Aziz recovered ^30,000/- belonging to the complainant from his house which he received or retained knowing or having reasons to believe to be robbed property. Chhote Lai also got recovered ^10,000/- from his house on
16.07.2006. Shivan Yadav recovered ?20,000/- on 07.07.2006 and further
^20,000/- on 16.07.2006 from his house.
Crl.A.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 2of5 •
After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against Shivan Yadav @ Vikas Yadav, Abdul Aziz, Chhote Lai and Wazid.
Javed @ Anwar @ Banars @ Ahmed Raji Siddiqui, Deena Nath @ Deena and Harman were declared Proclaimed Offenders. The prosecution examined 35 witnesses to substantiate the charges. In their 313 statements, the appellants pleaded false implication. On appreciating the evidence and considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court by the impugned judgment held the appellants- Shivan Yadav @ Vikas and Wazid guilty for committing offence under Section 395/397 IPG and 27 Arms Act.
Shivan Yadav @ Vikas, Wazid and Chhote Lai were convicted for committing offence under Section 412 IPC.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellants, on instructions from them, stated that the appellants have opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction. They, however, prayed to take lenient view and to modify the default sentence for non-payment of fine.
I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the
^ learned counsel for the appellants and have examined the record. Since the appellants have not opted to challenge the conviction under sections mentioned previously, the conviction recorded by the Trial Court is confirmed.
Regarding sentence, it appears that vide order dated 09.02.2012 appellant-Chotte Lai was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of ^10,000/- for committing offence under Section 412 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he wasto further undergo SIforten months. Appellants-
CrLA.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 2 of5 t
Shivan Yadav @ Vikas and Wazid were sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of^10,000/- each under Section 395 IPC; RI for seven years each under Section 397 IPC and RI for seven years with fine of ^10,000/- each under Section 412 IPC vide order on sentence dated 09.02.2012. In default of payment of fine they were to further undergo SI for twenty months each under Sections 395 and 412 IPC.
Nominal roll dated 01.10.2012 reveals that appellant Chotte Lai had already undergone five years, four months incarceration. He also earned remission for one month and 28 days as on 01.10.2012. He has already undergone the substantial sentence awarded to him.
Nominal roll dated 28.08.2012 reveals that appellant-Shivan
Yadav @ Vikas Yadav had already undergone sixyears, two months andten days incarceration. He also earned remission for one month and 20 days as on 28.02.2012.
Nominal roll dated 25.02.2013 reveals that appellant-Wazid had already undergone six years, one month and eighteen days incarceration. He also earned remission for four month and seven days as on 25.02.2013.
Counsel for the appellants prays to reduce the default sentence for non-paymentof fine as the appellants are unable to deposit the same due to their poverty. The appellants are not involved in any other criminal case and are not previous convicts.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 09.02.2011 qua appellant-Chhote Lai is modifiedto the extentthat the
Crl.A.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 4 of5 default sentence for non-payment of fine of ^10,000/- under Section 412
IPG will be SI for 15 days; qua appellants-Shivan Yadav @ Vikas Yadav and Wazid the default sentence for non-payment of total fine of ^10,000/- each under Sections 395 and 412 IPG shall be SI for 15 days each. Other terms and conditions ofthe order on sentence are left undisturbed.
The appeals are disposed ofin the above terms.
S^P.GARG, J.
MAY 08,2013 sa Crl.ANos. 1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 5 of5
Sessions Case No.52/2011 arising out of FIR No.263/2006 under Section
395/412/120B IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali by which appellant-
Chhote Lale was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years under Section 412 IPC with fine of ^10,000/-. The appellants-Shivan Yadav
@ Vikas and Wazid were sentenced to undergo RI for sevenyears with fine of ?10,000/- each under Section 395 IPC; RI for seven years each under
Section 397 IPC and RI for seven years each with fine of ?10,000/- each under Section 412 IPC vide order on sentence dated 09.02.2012.
Allegations against the appellants were that on or before
04.06.2006, they with their associates Javed @ Anwar@ Banars @ Ahmed
Raji Siddiqui, Deena Nath @ Deena and Harman conspired to commit dacoity at the office of Sukhbir Sharan Aggarwal at property No.1994, Katra Lachu Singh, Chandni Chowk, Delhi and on 04.06.2006 at about 3.15 p.m., they committed dacoity at the office of the complainant- Sukhbir
Sharan Aggarwal using deadly weapons. On 16.07.2006 Abdul Aziz recovered ^30,000/- belonging to the complainant from his house which he received or retained knowing or having reasons to believe to be robbed property. Chhote Lai also got recovered ^10,000/- from his house on
16.07.2006. Shivan Yadav recovered ?20,000/- on 07.07.2006 and further
^20,000/- on 16.07.2006 from his house.
Crl.A.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 2of5 •
After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against Shivan Yadav @ Vikas Yadav, Abdul Aziz, Chhote Lai and Wazid.
Javed @ Anwar @ Banars @ Ahmed Raji Siddiqui, Deena Nath @ Deena and Harman were declared Proclaimed Offenders. The prosecution examined 35 witnesses to substantiate the charges. In their 313 statements, the appellants pleaded false implication. On appreciating the evidence and considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court by the impugned judgment held the appellants- Shivan Yadav @ Vikas and Wazid guilty for committing offence under Section 395/397 IPG and 27 Arms Act.
Shivan Yadav @ Vikas, Wazid and Chhote Lai were convicted for committing offence under Section 412 IPC.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellants, on instructions from them, stated that the appellants have opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction. They, however, prayed to take lenient view and to modify the default sentence for non-payment of fine.
I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the
^ learned counsel for the appellants and have examined the record. Since the appellants have not opted to challenge the conviction under sections mentioned previously, the conviction recorded by the Trial Court is confirmed.
Regarding sentence, it appears that vide order dated 09.02.2012 appellant-Chotte Lai was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of ^10,000/- for committing offence under Section 412 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he wasto further undergo SIforten months. Appellants-
CrLA.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 2 of5 t
Shivan Yadav @ Vikas and Wazid were sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine of^10,000/- each under Section 395 IPC; RI for seven years each under Section 397 IPC and RI for seven years with fine of ^10,000/- each under Section 412 IPC vide order on sentence dated 09.02.2012. In default of payment of fine they were to further undergo SI for twenty months each under Sections 395 and 412 IPC.
Nominal roll dated 01.10.2012 reveals that appellant Chotte Lai had already undergone five years, four months incarceration. He also earned remission for one month and 28 days as on 01.10.2012. He has already undergone the substantial sentence awarded to him.
Nominal roll dated 28.08.2012 reveals that appellant-Shivan
Yadav @ Vikas Yadav had already undergone sixyears, two months andten days incarceration. He also earned remission for one month and 20 days as on 28.02.2012.
Nominal roll dated 25.02.2013 reveals that appellant-Wazid had already undergone six years, one month and eighteen days incarceration. He also earned remission for four month and seven days as on 25.02.2013.
Counsel for the appellants prays to reduce the default sentence for non-paymentof fine as the appellants are unable to deposit the same due to their poverty. The appellants are not involved in any other criminal case and are not previous convicts.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 09.02.2011 qua appellant-Chhote Lai is modifiedto the extentthat the
Crl.A.Nos.1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 4 of5 default sentence for non-payment of fine of ^10,000/- under Section 412
IPG will be SI for 15 days; qua appellants-Shivan Yadav @ Vikas Yadav and Wazid the default sentence for non-payment of total fine of ^10,000/- each under Sections 395 and 412 IPG shall be SI for 15 days each. Other terms and conditions ofthe order on sentence are left undisturbed.
The appeals are disposed ofin the above terms.
S^P.GARG, J.
MAY 08,2013 sa Crl.ANos. 1241/12, 1079/12 & 536/12 Page 5 of5