ALOK KUMAR BASU, J. ( 1 ) ALL the abovementioned five appeals arose out of the judgment and order dated 28th November, 2000 and 30th November, 2000 respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, alipore in the District of 24-Parganas (South) in connection with Sessions trial No. 2 (8) of 1998 corresponding to Sessions Case No. 38 (5) of 1998. ( 2 ) SAMAR Ray @ Kallu, Dinesh Das @ Dinesh Ram, Md. Sarwar khan @ Noor Sarwar Khan, Manoj Singh and Abdul Hai Gayen faced the sessions trial under Sections 395,397and 412 of the I. P. C. and all of them except Md. Sarwar Khan were found guilty under Sections 395,397and 412 of the I. P. C. and Sarwar Khan was found guilty under Sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. and they were convicted accordingly. ( 3 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge on hearing the accused persons finally sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life for the offence committed under Sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. No separate sentence was, however, passed under Section 412 of the I. P. C. against Samar Ray, Dinesh Das, Manoj Singh and Abdul Hai Gayen. ( 4 ) EACH of the convicted persons preferred separate appeal challenging both the order of conviction and sentence recorded against each of them. ( 5 ) WE have taken up all the five appeals together for disposal since those arose out of a common judgment and order. ( 6 ) THE prosecution case, in brief, was that on 19. 7. 1997 at about 12 o' clock in the noon Mr. K. J. Ramchandran Nair, Manager of Federal Bank ltd. . Tangra Branch under P. S. Entally along with his officers and staff were engaged in their usual banking business and at that time, a group of miscreants numbering about 6/8 being armed with revolver, dagger etc. suddenly entered inside the bank and thereafter they forced the customers present in the bank to go inside one corner of the cash counter. ( 7 ) THE miscreants cut off the telephone lines and at the point of weapons they started taking cash from the two cash counters. The miscreants thereafter forced Mr. suddenly entered inside the bank and thereafter they forced the customers present in the bank to go inside one corner of the cash counter. ( 7 ) THE miscreants cut off the telephone lines and at the point of weapons they started taking cash from the two cash counters. The miscreants thereafter forced Mr. Ramchandran Nair and other officers of the bank namely P. Ganapati Perumal, C. J. Augustine, cashier Sri Arup das and B. K. Moitra to go to the strong room of the bank and to open the vault and after opening of the vault, the miscreants took away rs. 5,60,000/- from the vault. One of the miscreants also assaulted Mr. Ramchandran Nair on his head inside the vault with the butt of a revolver causing bleeding injury. ( 8 ) THE miscreants took away in all Rs. 8,48,000/- from the bank. ( 9 ) MR. Ramchandran Nair, as soon as the miscreants had left the bank with their booty, informed the local Entally P. S. and when officers of entally P. S. arrived at the bank, a written complaint in the form of statement made by Mr. Ramchandran Nair was handed over disclosing the details of operation of the miscreants with the further information that the miscreants were talking in Bengali, they were within the age group of 25/ 30 years with medium complexions and wearing pants and shirts. It was further disclosed by Mr. Ramchandran Nair that the bundle of currency notes taken away by the miscreants were affixed with bank slips, stamps and stickers. ( 10 ) ON the basis of the written complaint of Mr. Ramchandran Nair, entally P. S. started case No. 164 dated 19. 7. 1997 and, at first, investigation was taken up by officers of Entally P. S. and subsequently officer attached to D. D. , Lalbazar, Anti Dacoity Section, took up the investigation and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons under Sections 395, 397 and 412 of the I. P. C. for their trial in open Court. ( 11 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, relying on the police papers and after hearing both prosecution and accused persons, framed charges under Sections 395,397 and 412 of the I. P. C. against all the five accused persons and all of them pleaded innocence and claimed for trial. ( 11 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, relying on the police papers and after hearing both prosecution and accused persons, framed charges under Sections 395,397 and 412 of the I. P. C. against all the five accused persons and all of them pleaded innocence and claimed for trial. ( 12 ) DURING trial, prosecution examined 42 witnesses and of those witnesses P. W. 1 was police-photographer, P. W. 2 was police-plan maker, p. W. 3 was Mr. Ramchandran Nair, the then Manager of the Federal Bank and the FIR maker, P. W. 4 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 were all bank officers and employees who were present at the time of dacoity, P. W. 9 and P. W. 10 were customers of the bank who were present at the time of dacoity, P. W. 24 to P. W. 34, P. W. 37 and P. W. 38 were all witnesses regarding recovery of money and other incriminating articles from the accused persons during investigation, P. W. 35 was the Judicial Magistrate who conducted t. I. parade during investigation, P. W. 36 was the doctor who treated p. W. 3 soon after the occurrence, P. W. 39 was another Judicial Magistrate who recorded confessional statement of accused Abdul Hai Gayen during investigation, P. W. 40 and P. W. 41 were the two officers of Entally P. S. who rushed to the place of occurrence on getting information about dacoity and received first information report and recorded statement of some of the witnesses and performed other parts of the investigation and P. W. 42 was the officer of D. D. , Lalbazar, Anti-Dacoity Section who took up the investigation from Entally P. S. and after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet. ( 13 ) PROSECUTION, during trial, also produced the original F. I. R. , several seizure lists regarding recovery of money and other incriminating articles, the T. I. parade sheets, the confessional statement of Abdul Hai gayen, injury report of P. W. 3, statements made by the accused persons during investigation under Section 27 of the Evidence Act leading to recovery and several registers and books of accounts of Federal Bank ltd. , Tangra Branch. , Tangra Branch. ( 14 ) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge on careful perusal of the entire prosecution evidence both oral and documentary and after considering submissions made on behalf of the accused persons and the prosecution, first of all, came to the finding that on 19. 7. 1997 a daring dacoity took place at Federal Bank Ltd. , Tangra Branch and rs. 8,48,000/- was looted away by miscreants from the bank and the said money was taken away both from cash counters and also from the vault of the bank. The learned Trial Judge to come to this finding mainly relied on the statements of P. W. 3 to P. W. 11 and also considered the relevant entries appearing in the books of accounts of the bank at the relevant date. ( 15 ) THE learned Trial Judge to hold the accused persons guilty under Sections 395, 397and 412 of the I. P. C mainly relied on the result of t. I. parade conducted in respect of each of the accused person when they were lodged in jail during investigation and also on their identification made by P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 during trial. The learned Judge took into consideration the statement of P. W. 35, the learned Judicial Magistrate who conducted the T. I. parade along with T. I. parade sheets. The learned judge recorded in his judgment that all the bank employees P. W. 3 to p. W. 8 and P. W. 11 identified all the five accused persons both during t. I. parade as also during their evidence before the Court as the persons who were physically present inside the bank on 19. 7. 1997 and took active part in looting away bank money. 7. 1997 and took active part in looting away bank money. ( 16 ) THE learned Trial Judge also considered the factum of recovery in respect of the four accused persons namely Abdul Hai Gayen, Samar ray, Dinesh Ram and Manoj Singh and came to conclusion that from the statement of P. W. 24, P. W. 25, P. W. 26, P. W. 27, P. W. 28, P. W. 29, P. W. 30 and P. W. 31 along with the statements of Abdul Hai Gayen, Manoj Singh, samar Ray, Dinesh Ram recorded by P. W. 42 it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that all these four accused persons after looting money from Federal Bank Ltd. retained part of the booty in their respective possession which were recovered during investigation by P. W. 42 and the witnesses mentioned above successfully proved the factum of seizure along with the respective seizure list. The learned Judge also found that the recovered money had bank seals and stickers. ( 17 ) THE learned Judge found that from accused Sarwar Khan no money looted away from bank was recovered, but, bank pass book was recovered as proved by P. W. 37. ( 18 ) THE learned Judge finally banked on the confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen Exhibit-22 to hold all the five persons guilty under Sections 395, 397 of the I. P. C. The learned Judge found from the deposition of P. W. 42 that after taking charge of investigation this P. W. went to different places both within and outside Bengal in search of the miscreants, but, ultimately on 20th January, 1998 from source information, he came to learn that Abdul Hai Gayen already detained in police lock up in Lalbazar in connection with other case would give important clue regarding identification of the miscreants and acting on such information, abdul Hai Gayen was interrogated and taken him in custody in connection with this case and pursuant to interrogation of Abdul Hai Gayen, P. W. 42 came to learn that under the leadership of Akunji since deceased, Abdul hai Gayen, Manoj Singh, Samar Ray, Dinesh Ram and Sarwar Khan committed dacoity at Federal Bank Ltd. , Tangra Branch on 19. 7. 1997. 7. 1997. ( 19 ) P. W. 42 following the disclosure of Abdul Hai Gayen subsequently took the other four accused persons in custody in connection with this case and all the other four accused persons were also in police lock up of lalbazar in connection with different cases at that time and pursuant to the statement of Abdul Hai Gayen and other four accused persons part of the looted money was recovered as stated earlier. Abdul Hai Gayen during investigation voluntarily gave a confessional statement which was recorded by P. W. 39 and Abdul Hai Gayen admitted the same to be his own confessional statement and he also admitted that he voluntarily gave the statement and he also reiterated the same during his examination under section 313 of the Cr. P. C. ( 20 ) THE learned Judge after being satisfied with the identification of all the five accused persons through their respective T. I. parade and through their respective identification by the officers and employees of the bank, from recovery of money from each of the accused persons except Sarwar Khan and finally, in view of the confessional statement of abdul Hai Gayen which could be used under Section 30 of the Evidence act against other accused persons came to his conclusion that prosecution evidence both oral and documentary beyond all shadow of doubt established guilt of each of the accused persons under Sections 395,397 of the I. P. C and also under Section 412 of the I. P. C. against Samar Ray, dinesh Ram, Manoj Singh and Abdul Hai Gayen. ( 21 ) THUS, the learned Trial Judge after considering prosecution evidence and after hearing submissions of both prosecution and accused persons convicted all the five accused persons under Sections 395/397 of the I. P. C. and except Sarwar Khan, convicted the other four accused persons also under Section 412 of the I. P. C. ( 22 ) THE learned Judge after recording his conviction order considered submissions of each of the accused persons on the point of sentence and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the learned Judge was of the view that all the accused persons should be sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for commission of a daring dacoity in a public bank. ( 23 ) WE have stated that all the five persons convicted in this case preferred separate appeal challenging their respective conviction and sentence. Mr. Sekhar Basu appears for accused Dinesh Ram, Mr. R. P. Bhattacharya appears for Samar Ray @ Kallu and Abdul Hai Gayen and mr. Sharma appears for Manoj Singh and Mr. Sarwar Khan. ( 24 ) MR. Sekhar Basu in his brief submission has challenged both the conviction order as well as the order of sentence recorded against his client Dinesh Ram. Mr. Basu contends that it would appear from the deposition of P. W. 42 that Dinesh Ram was taken in this case when he was already in police lock up at Lalbazar in connection with another case and thereafter Dinesh Ram was placed for T. I. parade and only the bank employees namely P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 identified Dinesh Ram at the T. I. parade. Mr. Basu contends that if we consider T. I. parade of Dinesh ram as held by the learned Judicial Magistrate P. W. 35, there is scope to argue that T. I. parade was conducted in a most mechanical manner and such T. I. parade does not inspire much confidence having regard to the fact that Dinesh Ram was already in police lock up and there was enough scope for prior identification of Dinesh Ram by the bank employees. ( 25 ) MR. Basu contends that apart from T. I. parade and subsequent identification of accused Dinesh Ram by the bank employee, prosecution also relied on the factum of recovery of some money from the possession of Dinesh Ram d. uring investigation. Mr. Basu submits that when we consider statement of P. W. 27 and P. W. 28 along with the statement of p. W. 34 and P. W. 42 who came forward to depose about such recovery of money from the possession of Dinesh Ram, we would notice that P. W. 27 and P. W. 28 were not at all reliable witnesses and P. W. 34 and P. W. 42 being police officials were highly biased against the accused person and they were bent upon for his conviction by any means. ( 26 ) MR. ( 26 ) MR. Basu, therefore, contends that when T. I. parade of Dinesh ram was not above suspicion and when the alleged recovery of money from the possession of Dinesh Ram was not totally satisfactory, the learned trial Judge was not, perhaps, justified in convicting Dinesh Ram on the basis of such evidence of prosecution. ( 27 ) ON the point of conviction of Dinesh Ram under Section 397 of the I. P. C. along with Section 395 of the I. P. C. , it has been the submission of Mr. Basu that there is nothing in evidence to indicate that Dinesh Ram assaulted P. W. 3 as alleged and in such a situation in view of the specific provision of Section 397 when Dinesh Ram was not found guilty for assaulting P. W. 3 even if some other miscreants had assaulted P. W. 3, dinesh Ram cannot be sentenced under Section 397 of the I. P. C. and in this context Mr. Basu has referred to the decision of Phool Kumar v. Delhi administration, reported in AIR 1975 SC page 905. ( 28 ) MR. Basu contends that when Dinesh Ram cannot be sentenced with the said of Section 397 of the I. P. C. , the sentence of imprisonment for life recorded by the learned Judge under Section 395 of the I. P. C. appears to be too harsh and this Court of appeal should favourably consider the order of sentence recorded against Dinesh Ram even if this court upholds his conviction under Section 395 of the I. P. C. ( 29 ) MR. R. P. BHATTACHARYA appearing for both the accused Samar Ray @ Kallu and Abdul Hai Gayen has placed before us written note of argument for each of the accused represented by him. ( 30 ) SO far as the case of Samar Ray @ Kallu is concerned, Mr. Bhattacharya submits that there was unusual delay in conducting T. I. parade and that apart this accused was already in police lock up at lalbazar and naturally, there was scope for prior identification of this accused and in such circumstances, no importance can be given to the t. I. parade and subsequent identification of this accused in Court by the bank employees. Mr. Mr. Bhattacharya contends that from the T. I. parade sheets of the learned Magistrate and also from the deposition of the bank employees namely P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11, we do not find anything to show that any of the bank employee gave any indication regarding the part played by this accused at the time of alleged dacoity in the bank. ( 31 ) MR. Bhattacharya submits that the witnesses examined by prosecution to prove the alleged recovery of money from the possession of this accused are not at all reliable or trustworthy and it is very much clear from the statement of these witnesses along with the statement of the investigating officer P. W. 42 that the witnesses were procured by I. O. to give false evidence against this accused. Mr. Bhattacharya, therefore, submits that the learned Judge committed grave error both in fact and law in convicting this accused on the basis of prosecution evidence. ( 32 ) AS regards Abdul Hai Gayen, Mr. Bhattacharya submits that from the judgment of the learned Trial Court it is crystal clear that this accused, in fact, helped the investigating officer to a great extent by giving a confessional statement and the investigating officer P. W. 42, in fact, did not face any trouble to complete investigation and he simply banking on the confessional statement of this accused took the other accused persons in custody and made the alleged recovery of money from those accused persons. ( 33 ) MR. Bhattacharya finally submits that having regard to the role played by Abdul Hai Gayen and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the case, the learned Trial Court was not at all justified in recording imprisonment for life against Samar Ray @ Kallu and Abdul Hai Gayen and keeping in view the confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen, this court of appeal should reduce the sentence passed against both the accused persons by the trial Court. ( 34 ) MR. Sharma appearing for accused Manoj Singh and Md. Sarwar khan contends that so far Sarwar Khan is concerned, admittedly, no money was recovered from his possession and only a pass book of Federal Bank, tangra Branch was recovered and from this pass book it cannot be stated that accused Sarwar Khan participated in commission of dacoity. ( 35 ) AS regards Manoj Singh, Mr. Sarwar khan contends that so far Sarwar Khan is concerned, admittedly, no money was recovered from his possession and only a pass book of Federal Bank, tangra Branch was recovered and from this pass book it cannot be stated that accused Sarwar Khan participated in commission of dacoity. ( 35 ) AS regards Manoj Singh, Mr. Sharma reiterated the submissions of Mr. Bhattacharya and contends that neither T. I. parade nor alleged recovery of money from Manoj Singh was sufficient to hold him guilty for the commission of dacoity. ( 36 ) MR. Sharma finally contends that even if this Court of appeal does not find any merit in the submission regarding conviction of these accused persons, this Court of appeal, having regard to the total fact and circumstances of the case should be kind enough to consider the order of sentence passed against them by the trial Court. ( 37 ) THE learned Advocate appearing for the State, in view of the submissions made by Mr. Basu, Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Sharma, contends before us that there is no challenge at all from any of the appellants regarding commission of dacoity at Federal Bank Ltd. , Tangra branch on 19. 7. 1997 and also regarding taking away of Rs. 8,48,000/- by the miscreants. ( 38 ) THE learned Advocate for the State submits that from the submissions made on behalf ot the appellants by their respective learned advocate it is very much clear that identification of the appellant by the bank employees as well as the factum of recovery of money from the possession of the accused persons except Md. Sarwar Khan have been challenged strongly. ( 39 ) THE learned Advocate for the State contends that this case has got one special feature and that special feature Is the disclosure made by accused Abdul Hai Gayen before the investigating officer regarding his involvement and also regarding involvement of the other four accused persons in the commission of dacoity at the Federal Bank Ltd. on 19th july, 1997. ( 40 ) THE learned Advocate for the State submits thatabdul Hai Gayen during investigation gave a confessional statement which was recorded by P. W. 39 and Abdul Hai Gayen at the time of his examination under section 313 of the Cr. ( 40 ) THE learned Advocate for the State submits thatabdul Hai Gayen during investigation gave a confessional statement which was recorded by P. W. 39 and Abdul Hai Gayen at the time of his examination under section 313 of the Cr. P. C. confessed that he took part in the dacoity along with the remaining four accused persons and police in presence of public witnesses recovered a part of the booty from his possession. It is available from the statement of P. W. 42, the investigating officer of the case, that pursuant to the statement of Abdul Hai Gayen, the other four accused persons were interrogated and pursuant to their statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, money was recovered from the possession of Samar Ray, Manoj Singh and Dinesh Ram. The learned advocate for the State contends that the confessional statement of Abdul hai Gayen was marked as Exhibit-22 and that can be effectively used against the remaining four accused persons under Section 30 of the evidence Act. ( 41 ) THE learned Advocate for the State submits that soon after taking of all the accused persons in custody in connection with this case, I. O. arranged for T. I. parade through P. W. 35 and during T. I. parade, all the bank employees namely P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 successfully identified all the four accused persons and during trial, also those witnesses made no mistake in the matter of identification of these accused persons who participated in commission of the dacoity. ( 42 ) THE learned Advocate for the State contends that during investigation money taken away from the bank and having slips and stickers of bank was recovered from four accused persons except Md. Sarwar Khan. ( 43 ) THE learned Advocate for the State concludes that from the T. I. parade, from subsequent identification of the accused persons during trial, from recovery of money from their possession and finally from the confessional statement of co-accused Abdul Hai Gayen, involvement of all the five accused persons in the commission of dacoity at Federal Bank ltd. ( 43 ) THE learned Advocate for the State concludes that from the T. I. parade, from subsequent identification of the accused persons during trial, from recovery of money from their possession and finally from the confessional statement of co-accused Abdul Hai Gayen, involvement of all the five accused persons in the commission of dacoity at Federal Bank ltd. , Tangra Branch on 19th July, 1997 was proved beyond any shadow of doubt and the learned Judge having regard to the prosecution evidence both oral and documentary made no mistake either in fact or in law in recording the order of conviction against the accused persons. ( 44 ) ON the question of sentence, the learned Advocate for the State contends that in broad daylight the accused persons committed a daring dacoity being armed with deadly weapons and looted away a huge amount of money from a public bank and in view of this fact and circumstances, there is no scope to interfere with the. order of sentence recorded by the learned Judge after hearing submissions of each of the accused persons. ( 45 ) WE have considered submissions of Mr. Basu, Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Sharma and also submissions of the learned Advocate for the state along with the written note of argument submitted by Mr. Bhattacharya. We have also carefully perused the prosecution evidence both oral and documentary. ( 46 ) FROM the submissions of the learned Advocates of ail the appellants we find that commission of dacoity at Federal Bank Ltd. , Tangra branch on 19th July, 1997 was not at alj challenged and, in fact, from the statements of P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 along with statement of P. W. 1, p. W. 2 and P. W. 40, P. W. 41 and P. W. 42, we have no doubt in mind to hold conclusively that a daring dacoity took place in the Federal Bank Ltd. , tangra Branch on 19th July, 1997 and from the books of accounts of the bank, we have reason to hold firmly that a sum of Rs. 8,48,000/- was taken away by the miscreants during such dacoity. 8,48,000/- was taken away by the miscreants during such dacoity. ( 47 ) THE only question for determination before us in view of the submissions made on behalf of the appellants is whether the learned Trial judge was justified in holding the appellants guilty of the offences under sections 395,397and 412 of the I. P. C. and whether the learned Judge was justified in sentencing the appellants to suffer imprisonment for life. ( 48 ) FROM the submissions of Mr. Basu, Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Sharma we find that the common ground of attack against the order of conviction has been regarding identification of the appellants and also regarding credibility of the prosecution witnesses to support the recovery of money from the appellants except Md. Sarwar Khan. ( 49 ) IT is an admitted position of fact and law that in a case of dacoity prosecution is required to prove two essential ingredients namely identification of the accused persons by the victims and recovery of the booty from the possession of the accused persons. ( 50 ) IN this case, we find from evidence of P. W. 42, the investigating officer, that soon after taking of the appellants in custody in connection with this case, arrangement was made for placing the appellants in T. I. parade and we find from the statement of P. W. 35 along with his T. I. parade sheets that all the employees of the bank were physically present at the time of commissibn of dacoity namely P. W. 3 to P. W. 8 and P. W. 11 and all of them successfully identified all the appellants during T. I. parade and all those witnesses also successfully identified all the appellants during their substantive evidence before the trial Court. ( 51 ) IT is accepted position of law that identification of a suspect at the time of T. I. parade will be of no value unless the same suspect is identified satisfactorily during trial and in this case we find from evidence that all the appellants were successfully identified both during T. I. parade as well as during trial by the employees of the bank. ( 52 ) WE find from record that during investigation except Md. Sarwar khan, from the possession of all the remaining four appellants money was recovered and the recovered money had the marking of Federal Bank ltd. ( 52 ) WE find from record that during investigation except Md. Sarwar khan, from the possession of all the remaining four appellants money was recovered and the recovered money had the marking of Federal Bank ltd. and from the statements of the public witnesses who were examined in connection with the recovery of money, we do not notice any infirmity wherefrom we can cherish any doubt regarding factum of recovery. ( 53 ) IN this case apart from identification of the appellants by the employees of the bank and recovery of money from them except Sarwar khan, we also get an additional piece of evidence in the form of confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen which was marked as Exhibit-22 and this confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen, if found legally admissible, can be utilized against the remaining four appellants under section 30 of the Evidence Act. ( 54 ) FROM the confessional statement itself along with the statement of Abdul Hai Gayen recorded during his examination under Section 313 of the Cr. P. G. , we have no doubt in mind that the confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen was voluntary and Abdul Hai Gayen without any influence or fear gave the statement whereby he not only implicated himself, but, he implicated the other four appellants in commission of the dacoity at the Federal Bank Ltd. , Tangra Branch on 19th July, 1997. ( 55 ) THUS, after considering the entire prosecution evidence both oral and documentary and after considering submissions of the learned advocates for the appellants and the learned Advocate for the State, we are of the considered view that in this particular case prosecution successfully proved the charge framed under Section 395 of the I. P. C. against all the five appellants and prosecution also proved the charge under Section 412 of the I. P. C. against all the appellants except md. Sarwar Khan. ( 56 ) MR. Sarwar Khan. ( 56 ) MR. Basu with reference to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme court reported in the case of Phool Kumar (supra) submits before us that since an offender found guilty under Section 395 of the I. P. C. can be awarded a minimum sentence of seven years only when he was found from evidence hurting or assaulting any person at the time of commission of dacoity and since in this case there was no evidence on record to show that any of the appellant assaulted P. W. 3 as alleged, none of the appellant including Dinesh Ram can be sentenced in the manner as was done by the learned Trial Judge. ( 57 ) WE have carefully gone through the ratio of decision rendered in the case of Phool Kumar (supra) and we find that their Lordships of the hon'ble Supreme Court after considering the relevant decision on the issue and after taking into consideration both Sections 397 and 398 of the I. P. C. together came to the conclusion that if from evidence it is established that the offender carried arms at the time of commission of dacoity that would be sufficient to record a minimum punishment of seven years with the aid of Section 397 of the I. P. C. in a case of dacoity. ( 58 ) IN the present case from the evidence of all the bank employees it was clearly established that all the appellants had arms with them at the time of commission of dacoity and hence, following the ratio of decision rendered in the case of Phool Kumar (supra) we find no merit in the contention of Mr. Basu. ( 59 ) NOW, we come to the final question as to whether the appellants were rightly sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life under Sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. ( 60 ) WE have considered submissions of Mr. Basu, Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Sharma and Mr. Bhattacharya in particular contended before us that since Abdul Hai Gayen, helped the investigating agency to a great extent in apprehending the other appellants by making a confessional statement, the learned Trial Court should have taken a lenient view in the matter of recording sentence and the appellants should not have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. Bhattacharya in particular contended before us that since Abdul Hai Gayen, helped the investigating agency to a great extent in apprehending the other appellants by making a confessional statement, the learned Trial Court should have taken a lenient view in the matter of recording sentence and the appellants should not have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. ( 61 ) THE learned Advocate for the State, on the other hand, submits that when appellants were found guilty in connection with a daring dacoity committed in a public bank, the learned Trial Court in proper appreciation of fact and evidence recorded the order of sentence. ( 62 ) WE find from Section 395 of the I. P. C. itself that a discretion was given by the legislature in the matter of recording sentence when a person is convicted under Sections 395/397 of the I. P. C. and having regard to the totality of the fact and circumstances of this case and keeping in mind the confessional statement of Abdul Hai Gayen, we are of the view that the appellants should be sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years each more under Sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. ( 63 ) THUS, in view of our forging discussion, we allow all the five appeals in part. We uphold the conviction of all the appellants under sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. and we uphold the conviction of appellant Dinesh Ram, Manoj Singh, Abdul Hai Gayen and Samar Ray @ kallu under Section 412 of the I. P. C. also. We, however, modify the sentence of life imprisonment of each of the appellants under Sections 395 and 397 of the I. P. C. and we direct that each of the appellants shall be sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and shall pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each in default shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years each more. ( 64 ) SINCE the trial Court did not impose any separate sentence under section 412 of the I. P. C. and since the State did not prefer any appeal on this score, we maintain the order of the trail Court. 5,000/- each in default shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years each more. ( 64 ) SINCE the trial Court did not impose any separate sentence under section 412 of the I. P. C. and since the State did not prefer any appeal on this score, we maintain the order of the trail Court. ( 65 ) SEND the LCR along with copy of this judgment forthwith to the trial Court for information and for issuance of fresh jail warrant in the name of all the appellants separately in the light of direction given by us in this judgment.