JUDGMENT 1. - These two appeals have been filed by the appellants Ramzan, Liyakat and Jamil Khan against the judgment dated November 30, 2004 of Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1 Alwar in Sessions Case No. 119 of 2003 (135 of 2003) whereby the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil Khan were convicted and sentenced under Section 395 IPC, to suffer 10 years RI with fine of Rs. 2,000/- each in default of payment of fine to further suffer one year RI, under Section 397 IPC to suffer 7 years RI and fine of Rs.5000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further suffer one year RI and accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil Khan were further convicted and sentenced under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act to suffer 3 years RI with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to suffer six months RI. 2. As both these appeals have been filed against the judgment dated November 30, 2004 in FIR Ex.P.19 (written report Ex.P.18), they are being disposed by this common judgment. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on July 28, 2003 at 3.30 a.m. complainant Lallu Khan s/o Roopa submitted a written report (Ex. P.18) at P.S. M.I.A. Alwar Camp Thekda ka Bas alleging therein that in the night at around 1.30 'O' clock wife of the complainant went outside the house to answer the natural call then 7-8 persons forcefully entered in the house and started beating his wife and snatched the ornaments which she was wearing. They also snatched the wrist watch of the complainant and some money from his pocket. On hearing hues and cries his younger brother reached over there. The miscreants while started running one amongst them was caught who sustained injuries due to fall. The miscreant who was caught disclosed his identity as Razaq and informed that his other associates were 7 in number and their names are Mehboob, Ashram, Jameel, Taiyab, Zahid, Ramzan and Liyakat, who are having arms with them and looted articles are also with them. It is further alleged that the complainant and others tried to catch them, however, they opened fire and ran away. His son Subedin and wife sustained injuries. It is further alleged that the complainant and others tried to catch them, however, they opened fire and ran away. His son Subedin and wife sustained injuries. On the aforesaid report, the police registered case against the accused persons for the offences under sections 395, 397 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act and the investigation was started. After concluding the investigation the police submitted charge sheet against the accused for the offences under sections 395 and 397 IPC and sections 3/25 of the Arms Act. On committal the trial court framed charge against the accused persons for the offences under sections 395 and 397 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act. In support of its case the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses and also exhibited 28 documents. The accused appellants were examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. and they denied the prosecution case. After hearing the arguments the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as mentioned above. 4. Mr. Shiv Lal Sharma, Mr. Nawab Ali Rathore, for Mr. N. A. Naqvi for the accused appellants Ramzan and Liyakat Ali and Mr. Ali Mohd. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the accused appellant Jamil Khan, argued that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond the reasonable doubt. There are several infirmities and contradictions in the statements of witnesses, and therefore no reliance can be placed on the testimony of these witnesses. The conviction based on such evidence is not sustainable and the same is liable to be quashed and set aside. The sentence awarded by the trial court is excessive, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and manner in which the incident is alleged to have taken place. There is no justification to award excessive sentence. The statements of accused appellants under section 313 Cr.P.c. are not recorded in accordance with the provisions of law, as all incriminating circumstances were not put to appellants and sufficient opportunity of defence is not afforded to appellants. No reliance can be placed on the statement of complainant because he has changed his version at different places. The incident had not taken place as stated by the complainant. The prosecution witnesses have made improvements in their statements and therefore no reliance can be placed on their testimony. The appellants were not previously known to the complainant and others. However, test identification parade is not conducted. The incident had not taken place as stated by the complainant. The prosecution witnesses have made improvements in their statements and therefore no reliance can be placed on their testimony. The appellants were not previously known to the complainant and others. However, test identification parade is not conducted. Therefore, the accused cannot be connected with the crime and the learned trial court committed an illegality while recording the conviction. There was a dispute in between the complainant and Mehboob regarding some money transaction and when Mehboob went to the complainant and demanded money, some dispute started and stones were pelted amongst them. The complainant caught Razaq who was an associate of Mehboob and later on concocted the false story. In these circumstances the learned counsel argued that the accused appellants may be acquitted and atleast their sentence should be reduced. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand supported the judgment of conviction against the accused appellants. The trial court rightly convicted the accused appellants. The findings arrived at by the trial court are just and proper. The trial court critically examined the material available on record and judgment of conviction is based on evidence and the accused appellants have been rightly convicted and sentenced. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the entire record. 7. Before proceeding further a brief of the evidence produced by the prosecution is necessary. PW.1 Takhat Singh, was one of the Motbir and independent witness to the memos of arrest and recoveries made from the accused persons. He put his signatures A to B on Ex. P.1 memo of arrest of accused Jahid Khan, Ex. P.2 arrest memo of accused Liyakat, Ex.P.3 arrest memo of accused Teyabkhan, Ex. P.4 arrest memo of accused Ramzan, Ex. P.5 arrest memo of accused Mehboob Khan, Ex.P.6 arrest memo of accused Ashram, Ex.P.7 arrest memo of Jamil khan, Ex.P.8 recovery memo of articles Silver Payjeb, from accused Jahid s/o Ramjani, Ex. P.9, recovery memo of wrist watch from accused Liyakat son of Alladin, Ex.P.10 recovery memo of live cartridge 315 Bore oriental and 4 hand made live cartridges from accused Ramjan, Ex. P.11 recovery memo of golden Hansali from accused Teyab son of Chhotelal, Ex.P.12 recovery memo of 12 bore Deshi Katta ( 12 bore country made gun)from accused Jamil, Ex. P.9, recovery memo of wrist watch from accused Liyakat son of Alladin, Ex.P.10 recovery memo of live cartridge 315 Bore oriental and 4 hand made live cartridges from accused Ramjan, Ex. P.11 recovery memo of golden Hansali from accused Teyab son of Chhotelal, Ex.P.12 recovery memo of 12 bore Deshi Katta ( 12 bore country made gun)from accused Jamil, Ex. P.13, 12 bore Deshi Katta from accused Mehboob, Ex.P.14 Deshi Katta 12 bore ( 12 bore country made gun) from accused Asram and Ex. P.15 site map of place of incident. He stated in his statement as under : " fnukad 28-7-2003 dh ckr gSA iqfyl Fkkuk jkex<+ okysA mUgksus crk;k fd jkex<+ ds taxy Mdsr vk x;s gS tks lqcg crk;k FkkA mUgksaus crk;k fd cxM+ frjk;s ij yYyw[kka ds /kj ij Mdsrh Mkyh gS fQj ogka rhu tus idMs+ x;sA ,d galyh eqy0 us viuh tka?k esa yxk j[kh Fkh feyh Fkh vkSj fiLrksy Fks ml le; esa nwj FkkA iqfyl us eqfYteku ls tks fiLrky] galyh vknh feys oks tIr fd;s FksA gekjs lcds lkeus eqfYteku dks fxj�rkj Hkh fd;k FkkA iqfyl ds lkFk yYyq[kka Hkh ogka FkkA yYyq [kka us mu rhuks dks ns[kdj dgk fd ;s rhuks Mdsrh Mkyus okyksa esa FksA " PW.2 Moolchand, who was also witness to recoveries from the accused persons, amongst PW.1, but he has been declared hostile. But he admitted his signatures on Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.15 and also stated that Teyab and Jamil were arrested in his presence and he also stated that Hansli was recovered from accused Teyab pointing towards him. But he admitted his signatures on Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.15 and also stated that Teyab and Jamil were arrested in his presence and he also stated that Hansli was recovered from accused Teyab pointing towards him. He stated in his statement as under: " rS;c o they dh rjQ b'kkjk djds dgk fd bu nksuks esjs lkeus idM+k FkkA rS;c dh rjQ b'kkjk djds crk;k fd galyh cjken gq;h FkhA they o rS;c ds ikl eSaus dksbZ gfFk;kj ugh ns[ksaA izn'kZ ih01 yxk;kr izn'kZ ih0 15 ij lh ls Mh esjs gLrk{kj gSA " PW.3 Hajarilal, SI Police Station MIA Alwar stated in his statement as under : " Fkkus ls jokuk gksdj pkSdh cxM+ frjk;k igqpsa ogka ls vkbZ lh pkSdh cyfcgkjh gSM dkfu0 jktsUnz gkdenhu dkfu0 ckcwyky dkfu0 dks lkFk BhdM+h dk ckl igqps ogka dkQh HkhM+ bdV~Bh gks jgh Fkh ,d O;fDr dks idM+ j[kk Fkk mlds pkSVs vk;h gq;h Fkh rFkk yYyq[kka o mlds /kjokyksa dks Hkh pksVs vk;h gq;h FkhA jTtkd us mlds lkFk vkJe] egewn] fy;kdr] rS;c] jetku] they dk vius lkFk gksuk crk;k Fkk bl ij mudh ryk'k ds fy;s eq0 yYyq[kk o vU; xzkeokfl;ks dks gejkt ysdj jokuk gksdj /kq/kM+ksn] ckeu[ksM+k ds taxyks esa ryk'k djrs gq, tk jgs Fks rks lh vks lkgc us t;sZ DosflfV fcykliqj ds QkVd ds ikl rhu Mdsrku idM+ fy;s crk;k o dgk fd vU; Mdsrku ds ds mlh ,sfj;k esa gksus ds ryk'k djus ds funsZ'k fn;s bl ij ge rykl djrs gq, [ksM+h ds taxy esa igqpsa rks ,d dikl ds [ksr esa ,d O;fDr eq>s fn[kk;h fn;k ftldks /ksjk nsdj idM+k mlds ikl ,d 315 cksj dk ftnka dkjrwl] pkj ns'kh gkFk ds cuk;s gq;s 315 cksj ds dkjrwl feys mlls uke irk iwNk rks mlus viuk uke jetku iq= nhu eksgEen eso fu0 dsFkokMk dk gksuk crk;kA fQj mlds ckn ges DosflVh feyh dh jkex<+ ds tkIrk us ,d cnek'k dks vkSj idM+ fy;k fQj ,l ,p vks lkgc ds lkFk ge yykpaM+h ds taxy x;s ogka geus rS;c eqy0 dks idM+k Fkk mlds ls ,d galyh feyh Fkh ftls vyx ls QnZ cukdj tIr fd;k Fkk fQj ge mlds ckn fcykliqj ds QkVd ds ikl igqaps rks unh ds ikl taxy esa they fNik gqvk feyk mldh ryk'kh ysus ij ,d ns'kh dV~Vk 12 cksj yksM+sM o dkjrwl 12 cksj feys Fks lh vks lk0 us vkJe o egcwc eqy0 idM+ j[ks Fks tgka ge igqps ogka fy[kk i<+h Hkh ogha dh FkhA xkao okyks us eqy0 fy;kdr dks idM+k Fkk ftldh fy[kki<+h Hkh ogha dh FkhA cnyq[kk us ekSds ij galyh dks ns[k dj viuh gksuk crk;k FkkA lHkh gfFk;kj] tIr'kqnk dkjrql o eky dh fy[kk i<+h dj eqyfteku dks fxj�rkj fd;kA " PW.4 Neksingh, Head Constable Armorer, Reserve Police Lines, Alwar, who examined the arms recovered from the accused persons. He stated in his statement as under : " fnukad 16-8-2003 dks esa gSM dkfu0 ds vkeksZjj ds in ij iqfyl ykbZu esa rSukr FkkA ml fnu Fkkuk iqfyl ,e vkbZ , ds izfrosnu ij gfFk;kjks dh tkap dh FkhA eq>s rhu isdsV lhYM voLFkk esa izkIr gq, Fks tks dkfu0 Hkheflag o calhyky yk;s Fks lhy uewuk ds0lh0,e0jkt0 iqfyl lhy [kksydj eqvk;uk fd;k FkkA rhuks dV~Vs ekdkZ ,0ch0lh0 rhu iSdsV esa Fks tks ns'kh 12 cksj ds cus dV~Vs Fks muds mij fdlh QSDV~h dk jftLV~j ua0 o iwQ ekdkZ ugha FkkA rhuksa dV~Vksa dk ,D'ku esdsfute Bhd dke dj jgk FkkA rhuks dV~Vksa ls Qk;j djus ij Qk;j gks ldrk gSA rhuksa dV~Vs Qk;j vkElZ dh rkjhQ esa vkrs gSaA rhuksa dV~Vksa dh csjybaM ds mij igpku fpUg gS tks ,u ,l ,] ,u ,l ch] ,u ,l ch] ,u ,l ch vafdr fd;k vkSj mUgh dkfu0 ds }kjk okfil Fkkuk ,e vkbZ , Hkst fn;k x;kA fjiksZV izn'kZ ih0 17 gS tks esjh dyeh gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA " PW.5 Banbihari, HC No. 138 Police Station MIA Alwar stated that Sabudin came to him at Bagad Chowki at 2.55 a.m. who stated to him that Thekda Ka Bass at the residence of Lallu Khan some miscreants came and they fired at them and one of the miscreant has been caught by them. He stated in his statement as under : " yYyq ds edku igqaps ogka mUgksus ,d cnek'k idM+k gqvk Fkk mldk irk iwaNk rks mlus viuk uke jTtkd crk;k tks gkftj vnkyr eqy0 gSA jTtkd ds dqN pksVs Hkh vk;h gq;h Fkh eksds ij tks vkneh Fks rks mUgksaus crk;k fd Hkkxus ds nkSjku mlds pksVs vk;h FkhA ogka yYyq vkSj xkao ds dkQh vkneh FksA igys geus jTtkd dks vLirky HkstkA fQj ge cnek'kksa dh ryk'k esa jkex<+ dh rjQ x;sA ykypaM+h o fcykliqj ds taxy esa cnek'kksa dh ryk'k dh ftu taxyks esa gesa cnek'k fey x;s gekjs lkFk Fkkus jkex<+ okys Hkh cnek'ksa dh ryk'k dj jgs Fks o lh vks lkgc o ifCyd ds vkneh Hkh FksA taxay esa ls geus dqy lkr eqy0 idM+s FksA eqy0 jetku ls ,d dkjrwl ftank 315 cksj vkSj pkj dkjrwl ns'kh gkFk ds cus gq, cjken gw,] rS;c ls galyh lksus dh] they ls ,d 12 cksj dk yksMsM dV~Vk vkJe ls ,d 12 cksj dk yksMsM dV~Vk o nks ftank dkjrwl] egcwc ls ,d 12 cksj dk yksMsM dV~Vk feys FksA lHkh eqyfteku ftudks taxy ls idM+k Fkk vkt gkftj vnkyr ekStqn gSA " Pw.6 Banshilal, Constable No.345 Police Station M.I.A. Alwar stated about his posting at MIA Camp Dekda and receipt of report by him and thereafter handing over it to the Police Station MIA at 4.00 a.m. over which case No.259/03 was marked and return back to him for giving it to SHO. Report is Ex .P.18 which was chalked out as FIR Ex. P.19 where he has put his signatures at place A to B.PW.7 Dr. Amarsingh Rathore, who examined the injuries of Subdeen son of Lallu, Smt. Janti wife of Lallu and Lallu son of Roopa, on 29.7.20003. Report is Ex .P.18 which was chalked out as FIR Ex. P.19 where he has put his signatures at place A to B.PW.7 Dr. Amarsingh Rathore, who examined the injuries of Subdeen son of Lallu, Smt. Janti wife of Lallu and Lallu son of Roopa, on 29.7.20003. He stated thus : " Jh lqcnhu iq= yYyw tkfr eso dh pksVks dks esfMdy eqvk;uk fd;k FkkA ftlds 'kjhj ij fuEu pksV Fkh %& 1- [kjksp yky jax 1x1 lseh0 ck;s gkFk ds vaxwBs esa 2- dqpyk gqvk ?kko 3x3x1 lseh0 ftlesa yky gfFk;kj ls vkbZ FkhA ftldh vof/k 24 ?kaVs ds Hkhrj dh Fkh pksV izfr izn'kZ ih0 20 ftl ij ,s ch esjs gLrk{kj ,oa ,Dl LFkku ij et:c dk vaxwBk fu'kuh o lh ls Mh et:c dk igpku fpUg vafdr gSA mlh fnu Jherh tUrks iRuh yYyw eso dh pksVks dk eqvk;uk fd;k ftlds 'kjhj ij ,d pksV Ldzsp tks 6 lseh0 dh gS yky jax fy;s gq;s xnZu dh ckbZ rjQ gSA mDr pksV lk/kkj.k o dqan gfFk;kj ls 24 ?kaVs ds Hkhrj dh gSA mlh fnu eSaus yYyw iq= :ik dh pksVksa dk eqvk;uk fd;k Fkk ftlds 'kjhj ij fuEu pksVs ikbZ xbZ Fkh 1- uhyxw yky jax 6x4 lseh0 nkfguh vxz Hkqtk 2- [kjksp yky jax 2x1 lseh0 psLV esa ckbZ vkSj fiNys fgLls esa 3- [kjksp 1x1 lseh0 nkfgus gkFk dh chp dh vaxqyh esa 4- [kajksp 1x 1/2 lseh0 ck;s gkFk ds vaxwBs ij mDr lHkh pksVs lk/kkj.k o dqn gfFk;kj ls vkbZ gqbZ FkhA ,oa 24 ?kaVs ds Hkhrj dh FkhA pksV izfrosnu izn'kZ ih0 22 gS ftl ij ,s ls ch esjs gLrk{kj lh ls Mh et:c ,a bZ ls ,Q igpku dk fpUg vafdr gSA PW.8 Panchya, villager stated about how he caught hold of accused Teyab and thereafter police came and he was arrested. In his statement he stated thus: " lu~ 2003 esa 15 vxLr ls igys dh ckr gS eSa vius [ksrksa ij maV pjkus x;k FkkA lqcg 10 cts dh ckr gSA cwan vkjgh FkhA ge cSBs FksA lM+d dks dzksl djds ,d vkneh gekjh vksj vk jgk FkkA ml vkneh us gels dgk fd esjh xk; [kks xbZ gSA rks geus dgk fd geus dksbZ xk; ugha ns[khA rks eSus mlls iwNk fd rsjs iSj fdpM+ esa dSls gks jgs vkSj pIiy rsjs isjksa esa D;k ugha gSA fQj og ?kcjkdj cksyk eSa jkr dk ijs'kku gwWA fQj eSaus dgk fd rw Mdsrksa esa rks ugh rks og Hkkxus yxk rks eSaus mls ckFk Hkj dj idM+ fy;kA idM+us ds ckn eSaus gYyk fd;k rks vkSj Hkh yksx vk x;sA vkSj iqfyl Hkh vk x;hA fQj mldks iqfyl ds gokys dj fn;kA xokg us gkftj vnkyr eqy0 rS;c dks gkFk yxk dj dgk fd bls eSaus idM+k Fkk vkSj blh dks idM+ dj iqfyl ds gokys fd;k FkkA " PW.9 Asar Khan, stated about the incident took place at the residence of his brother Lallu. He put his signature A to B on the site map of the place of incident Ex. P.23. He also put his signature on Ex. P.24. In his statement he stated thus : " yYyw esjs pkpk dk yM+dk gSA vkt ls ikap&N% efgus igys jkr dks 1&1-30 cts dh ckr gSA eSa ?kj ij ls jgk Fkk esjs ikl yYyw dk HkkbZ lgkcqnhu vk;k FkkA mlus eq>s txk;k vkSj dgk fd yYyw ds ?kj MdSr vk x;s ftuesa ls ,d dks idM+ j[kk gSA eSa fQj eksVjlkbfdy mBkdj iqfyl pkSdh ij x;kA esjs lkFk lgkcqnhu vkSj tkfdj x;sA geus iqfyl dks dgk fd xksyh pyh vkSj MdSrh My jgh gSaA fQj iqfyl okyksa dks eksVjlkbfdy ls cSBk ys x;sA ckn esa Fkkus ls Hkh thi vk xbZ FkhA ekSds ij ges ,d vkneh cank feyk ftldk uke jTtkd Fkk tks vkt gkftj vnkyr eqy0 gSA nwljs fnu iqfyl us yYyw ds ?kj dk uDlk eksdk cuk;k FkkA tks izn'kZ ih0 22 ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA izn'kZ ih0 24 ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA " PW.10 Lallukhan was the main eye witness, injured at the time of incident. He specifically implicated Ashram, Teyab, Mahboob, Jahid, Ramjani and Razak. Mehboob and Razak pointed Katta ( country made guns) at him. He specifically implicated Ashram, Teyab, Mahboob, Jahid, Ramjani and Razak. Mehboob and Razak pointed Katta ( country made guns) at him. Jahid shown knife. Mehboob gave lathi blow on the head of his son. He specifically implicated Ashram, Teyab, Mahboob, Jahid, Ramjani and Razak. Mehboob and Razak pointed Katta ( country made guns) at him. Jahid shown knife. Mehboob gave lathi blow on the head of his son. In his statement he stated thus : " uke ls esa vkJe] rS;c egcwc] tkfgn] jetkuh dks tkurk gwa vkSj dqN dks esa 'kDy ls tkurk Fkk tks vkt gkftj vnkyr gSA vkJe] egcwc o rS;c dh b'kkjk djds dgk fd bu rhuksa us eq>s uhe ds isM+ ds lkFk yxkdj [kM+k dj fn;k egcwc o vkJe us nksukas rjQ ls esjs dV~Vs yxk fn;k vkSj cksys fd crk eky dgka gS eSus dgk fd esjs ikl dqN eky ugha gS rc jTtkd] jetku o tkfgn us eq>s ykBh ls ekjuk 'kq: dj fn;kA esjs gkFk] duiVh ds ihNs] dU/ks] isjksa ij pksVs vk;h fQj iSjksa ds twrks esa ls tkfgn us pkdw fudkyk vkSj esjs cky idM+dj dgk fd crk eky dgka gS vkSj ,d pkdw dh esjs nkfguh rjQ ihB ds mijh fgLls esa ekjh fQj egcwc us dgk fd ;k rks crk ns ugha rks rsjs cPps dks [kRe djsxsa fQj esjs lkeus egcwc us esjs cPps ds flj esa ykBh ekjh vkSj eSus cPps ds dku ds ikl egcwc us dV~Vk pyk;k ftlds Njs esjs cPps dks ugh yxs Fks oks csgks'k gksdj fxj x;k fQj vkJe o gkftj vnkyr eqy0 they dh rjQ b'kkjk djds dgk fd ge bls laHkkyrs gS rqe ckfd;ks dks laHkkyksa fQj egcwc] rS;c] jetku og tkfgn esjh vkSjr dks [khapdj yk jgs Fks ejh vkSjr esjs HkkbZ ds ?kj dh rjQ tku cpkus ds fy;s Hkkx jgh Fkh rc bls jkLrs ls gh [khap yk;sA fQj rS;c] egcwc] tkfgn es ls rS;c us esjh vkSjr tUuh dh galyh [khap yh tkfgn us pkdw uksd ij ik;tsc [kksy yh vkSj egcwc us esjh ifRu dks fups iVddj mlds yykV ij dV~Vk yxk j[kk FkkA fQj fy;kdr dh rjQ b'kkjk djds dgk fd blus esjs gkFk ls ?kM+h Nhuh Fkh o esjh tsc ls 2500 :Ik;s fudkys FksA " PW.11 Janno wife of Lallukhan, stated in her statement as under : ge ckgj Hkkx jgs Fks ;s Hkhrj [khap jgs Fks fQj esjk yM+dk lqcsnhu [kM+k gqvk mlds flj ij dV~Vk yxk fn;k vkSj ykBh ekjh o eq>s dgk fd eky crk vkSj eq>s uhe ds ikl [khapdj ys x;s fQj buesa ls ,d us esjk gkFk idM+k Fkk ok egcwc us esjs Nkrh ij dV~k yxk fn;k o rS;c us esjs xys ls galyh [khap yh tkfgn us esjh Ikk;tsc [kksyh fQj esjk nsoj vk;k mlus egcwc dks idM+ fy;k tks NqM+kdj Hkkx x;k fQj jTtkd dks esjs ifr o nsoj us feydj idM+ fy;k ckfd Lkc Hkkx x;s tkrs gq;s bUgksus dV~Vs o iRFkj Pkyk;s FksA xokg us eqy0 egcwc tkfgn] jTtkd dks uke o 'kDy tkuuk crk;k vkSj vfHk0 jetku dks dgk fd bls esa tkurhA jetku ekjihV esa gksxk esa ugha dg ldrh ij blus eqga ij diM+s yRrs cka/k j[ks FksA jetku dh rjQ b'kkjk djds dgk fd budks esa ugha tkurhA vfHk0 us tc uke crk;k fd rc fd rS;c galyh [ksapA PW.12 Jakir Hussain, stated about the dacoity took place at the residence of Lallu and about this brother of Lallu to him. Brother of Lallu and he informed about the dacoity to the police. He also informed about detaining of Razak. In his statement he stated thus : " ge tc eksds ij x;s rks eSaus yYyw dh ?kjokyh o mlds yM+ds ds flj ij pksV yxh ns[kh FkhA yYyq ds yM+ds lqcsnhu ds flj ij pksV FkhA jTtkd us vius lHkh lkfFk;ks ds uke crk;s Fks mlus ;g Hkh crk;k Fkk fd mudk fdl jkLrs ls tkus dk bjknk Fkk vkSj mlh vk/kkj ij iqfyl us mudks idM+k FkkA gesa fQj fnYyh lkbZM ls vk;h dasVj esa fcBkdj nks iqfylokys] jTtkd] esa o rkm dk yM+ds glu dks vLirky Hkst fn;k FkkA eSaus eksds ij jTtkd ds ikl dksbZ lkeku ugha ns[kkA cfu;s dks QkeZ ij tks egcwc dke djrk gSA eSa mldks tkurk gwa tks vkt vnkyr gS buesa ls jTtkd dks Hkh igpkurk gwa tks vkt ugha vk;k 'ks"k dks esa ugh igpkurkA " PW.13 Sabudin, one of the neighbour of complainant, who stated that in the night of 27 at 1.30 a.m. his wife wake up him and stated that at the residence of Lallu some thieves have come. On this he reached at the residence of Lallu. He stated in his statement thus : " fQj esa ogk x;k eSaus ogka yYyq oxs- dks ns[kk muds [kwu fudy jgs Fks yYyq o mlds yM+ds ds [kwu vk jgs Fks ckfd eSaus ogka lc Mdsrks dks Hkh ns[kk esa ogka igqpk rks eq>s ns[k dj Mdsr Hkkxus yx x;s fQj geus ,d Mdsr jTtkd dks idM+ fy;k ckfd lc Hkkx x;sA fQj iqfyl ykypaMh ds igkM+ dj x;h eSa Hkh lkFk x;k Fkk tgka iqfyl us Mdsrks dks idM+k FkkA Mdsrks ls ,d galyh cjken dh Fkh eSa rks HkkxnksM+ esa yxk jgk Fkk rhu dV~Vs Hkh cjken gq;s Fks vkSj dkjrwl Hkh FksA gkftj vnkyr eqyfteku dks iqfyl us ykypaMh ds taxy ls idM+k FkkA " PW.14 Anand Singh, Arms Clerk, stated that on 7.10.03 he was posted as Arms Clerk in the office of Distt. Magistrate Alwar. On that day on a request of SP Alwar in case No. 250 of 2003 against Ramjan, Jamil, Mehboob and Asram under section 3/25 of the Arms Act. He presented the said case report before the Distt. Magistrate Alwar. On that day on a request of SP Alwar in case No. 250 of 2003 against Ramjan, Jamil, Mehboob and Asram under section 3/25 of the Arms Act. He presented the said case report before the Distt. Magistrarte Shivjiram Pratihar, who as per the powers vested in him under sectionm 39 of the Arms Act, gave sanction for prosecuting the accused persons under section 3/25 of the Arms Act. The file after getting signature given to SP Alwar which is Ex. P.25 where A to B is signature of Distt. Magistrate Shivjiram Paratihar and as I worked under him and that is why I know his signatures. PW.15 Subedin son of Lallu, who was injured during dacoity committed by the accused appellants, implicated all the accused persons including Mehboob, Razak and Ashram, who were present in the court. He stated thus: " esjs flj esa pksV vk;h Fkh bl ckr dks djhc pkj efgus gks x;s jkr dh ckr gS eSa gekjs ?kj ij ls jgk Fkk eqfYteku leLr gkftj vnkyr vk;sA uksV0 eqfYteku leLr dh rjQ b'kkjk djds ;s vk;s FksA egcwc ds gkFk yxkdj crk;k fd bls geus idM+ fy;k Fkk blh dks dh idM+k Fkk egcwc ds gkFk yxkdj dgk fd dV~k blus Hkh pyk;k FkkA vkSj vkJe ds gkFk yxkdj dgk fd blus Hkh dV~Vk pyk;k Fkk ;s xgus ekax jgs Fks vkSj xguksa ds fy;s dV~Vk pyk;k FkkA esjs firk ds Hkh ihNs xnZu ij pksV vk;h FkhA esjs firk dks vkJe o egcwc us ekjk FkkA " PW.16 Kailash Chand Meena, Police Inspector stated that on 28.7.2003 he was posted as SHO MIA, Alwar. On that day Lallu submitted report over which he made endorsement and Constable Bansilal was sent to Police Station for registering the case and Santlal ASI sent the report back after registering FIR where G to H Santlal put his signature. FIR Ex. P.19 was chalked out. On 29.7.2003 he prepared the site map of the incident place Ex. P.23 where he put his signature E to F and C to D and G to H are signatures of Motbirans. On 28.7.2003, accused Jahid, Liyakat, Teyab, Ramjan, Mehboob, Ashram and Jamil were arrested through arrest memo Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.7 where he put his signature E to F and A to B and C to D are the signatures of Motbirans. On 1.8.2003 by Ex. On 28.7.2003, accused Jahid, Liyakat, Teyab, Ramjan, Mehboob, Ashram and Jamil were arrested through arrest memo Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.7 where he put his signature E to F and A to B and C to D are the signatures of Motbirans. On 1.8.2003 by Ex. P.23 accused Rajjak was arrested. On 1.8.2003 accused Jahid gave information that he is prepared to give recovery of silver Payjeb, which is Ex. P.27 and recovery of Payjeb is vide Ex. P.8 and on it E to F he put his signature where A to B and C to D are the signatures of Motbirans and at place X thumb impressison of accused was obtained. P.27 and recovery of Payjeb is vide Ex. P.8 and on it E to F he put his signature where A to B and C to D are the signatures of Motbirans and at place X thumb impressison of accused was obtained. He further stated in his statement as under : " uD'kk eksdk cjkenxh izn'kZ ih0 15 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh Mh ekrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxqBk gS mlh fnu eqy0 fy;kdr us LosPNs;k ls bRryk nh og ,d ?kM+h fcyliqj jsYos ykbZu ds ikl >qMs ls cjken djk ldrk gwa QnsZ bRryk izn'kZ ih0 28 gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxqBk gSA eqrkfcd bRryk eqy0 fy;kdr us ,d ?kM+h cjken djk;h ftldh QnZ tIrh izn'kZ ih0 9 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh ekrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gS ftldk uD'kk eksdk ih0 11 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gSA fnukad 28-7-2003 dks 9-20 , ,e ij eqy0 jetku ls ,d dkjrwl ftank 319 cksj vkfjtuy o pkj gkFk ds cus dkjrwl ftank 315 cksj tCrh fd;s Fks ftldh QnZ tIrh izn'kZ ih0 10 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gSA ftldk uD'kk eksdk ih0 11 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gSA mlh fnu eqy0 rS;c ls ,d galyh lksus dh mldh dCts ls t;Zs QnZ izn'kZ ih0 11 cjken dh Fkh ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gS mlh fnu eqy0 they ds dCts ls ,d ns'kh dV~Vk 12 cksj yksMsM uktk;t t;sZ QnZ izn'kZ ih0 12 tCr fd;k Fkk ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gS mlh fnu eqy0 egcwc ds dCts ls ,d ns'kh dV~Vk 12 cksj yksMsM t;sZ izn'kZ ih0 13 tCr fd;k Fkk ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gS mlh fnu eSaus ,d ns'kh dV~Vk yksMsM 12 cksj o ftank dkjrwl 12 cksj eqy0 vkJe ds dCts ls t;sZ QnZ izn'kZ ih0 14 tCr fd;k Fkk ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS x LFkku ij eqy0 dk vaxwBk gS izn'kZ ih 15 , gkykr uD'kk eksdk gs ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA fnukad 2-8-2003 dks eSus ?kVukLFky dk rLnhdh utjh eksdk rLnhd fujh{k.k rS;kj fd;k Fkk tks izn'kZ ih0 14 gS ftl ij bZ ls ,Q esjs , ls ch o lh ls Mh eksrchjku ds gLrk{kj gS ftl ij eqyfteku ds gLrk{kj o vaxwBs djk;s FksA gkykr eksdk fujh{k.k izn'kZ ih0 14 , gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA " 8. The accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil were amongst others accused, who committed dacoity at the residence of Lallukhan and looted property from his house. The prosecution witnesses Takhat Singh (PW.1), Hajarilal (PW.3), Banbihari (PW.5), Lallu Khan (Pw.10), Janno (PW.11) and Subedin (PW.15) all identified the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil came at the residence of Lallukhan and committed dacoity. Lallu Khan (PW.10) and Janno (PW.11) stated that Liyakat snatched wrist watch and Rs. 2500 from him. Wrist watch recovered from Liyakat was identified by Lllukhan belonging to him. From the bare perusal of the statements of the prosecution witnesses mentioned above, it is clear that the prosecution has been able to prove the case against the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil beyond reasonable doubt for the offences charged against them. Accused Liyakat was arrested vide Ex. P.2 arrest memo and on the basis of information given by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act ( Ex.P.28) wrist watch was recovered from him vide Ex. P.9. PW.10 Lallukhan proved and identified that the wrist watch recovered from Liyakat belonged to him. The arrest memo and recovery memo Ex.P.2 and Ex. P.9 were proved by the independent witness Takhat Singh (PW.1) and the same were also proved by Kailash Chand Meena (PW.16) SHO in his statement, thus they were rightly convicted under section 395 and 397 IPC beyond reasonable doubt by the trial court. Accused appellants Ramzan was arrrested vide arrest memo Ex. P.4 and from his possession one live cartridge original and four live cartridges hand made (recovery memo Ex. P.10) were recovered to be used in 315 bore Barrel gun. PW.1 Takhat Singh proved Ex. P.4 and Ex. P.10 in his statement and stated that he put his signatures on Ex. P.4 and Ex. P.10. In Ex.P.10 the recovered one live cartridge was marked as D and Four recovered hand made live cartridges were marked as D1. The FSL in its report dated 15.9.04 stated that packet D contained one 7.62 mm. K.F. Rimless cartridge marked L/6 and Packet D-1 contained Four locally made cartridges marked L 7 to L/10. P.4 and Ex. P.10. In Ex.P.10 the recovered one live cartridge was marked as D and Four recovered hand made live cartridges were marked as D1. The FSL in its report dated 15.9.04 stated that packet D contained one 7.62 mm. K.F. Rimless cartridge marked L/6 and Packet D-1 contained Four locally made cartridges marked L 7 to L/10. In the result the FSL found that one 7.62 mm rimless cartridge (L/6) from packet D was found in mnessfired condition and Four locally made iron cartridges with locally made lead bullets ( L/7 to L/ 10) from packet D-1 are fire worthy ammunition, one cartridge (L/9) was also test fired in the laboratory and calibire of these cartridges (L/7 to L/10) appear to be 8 mm/ .315". Thus it is clear that four cartridges recovered from Ramjan vide Ex. P.10 were fire worthy ammunition and one 7.62 rimless cartridge (L/6) was found in mess fired condition. PW.14 Anandsingh, Arms Clerk, proved the sanction Ex. P.25 for prosecution of accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil under section 3/25 of the Arms Act for the recovery of arms from them. Jamil accused appellant was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. P.7 and from his possession one Deshi 12 bore Katta was recovered and the witness Takhat Singh proved Ex. P.12 in the court and stated that the recovery was made in his presence and he put his signature at place A to B. Mool Chand (PW.2) though declared hostile, but he proved his signatures on Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.15. PW.4 Nafe Singh Armourer in the Police Line Alwar stated that all the three packets which contained 12 Bore Deshi kattas. All the Kattas were found to be in working condition in mechanism. He placed on record report by him Ex. P.17 over which he put his signature A to B. As submitted above it is further submitted that Anand Singh (PW.14) proved the sanction under section 39 granted by the Distt. Magistrate for the prosecution of the accused appellant for offence under section 3/25 Arms Act for recovery of deshi Katta from him. Thus the prosecution has been able to prove case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil for the offences under sections 3/25 of the Arms Act and they have been rightly convicted and sentenced under sections 3/25 of the Arms Act. Thus the prosecution has been able to prove case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil for the offences under sections 3/25 of the Arms Act and they have been rightly convicted and sentenced under sections 3/25 of the Arms Act. I am in agreement with the findings recorded by the trial court for the offences under sections 395, 397 IPC against the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil and for sections 3/25 Arms Act against the accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil. The findings arrived at by the trial court cannot be said to be perverse. 9. The argument of the learned counsel for the accused appellants that the sentence awarded to the accused appellants for section 395 IPC is excessive. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I reduce the sentence of 10 years to 7 years for offence under Section 395 IPC. 10. For these reasons the appeals filed by the accused appellants are partly allowed. The judgment of conviction dated November 30, 2004 of Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1 Alwar in Sessions Case No. 119/2003(135/03) is confirmed for the offences under sections 395 and 397 of the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil and further conviction of accused appellants Ramjan and Jamil for offence under Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act, but the sentence awarded to the accused appellants Ramjan, Liyakat and Jamil for the offence under section 395 IPC from 10 years RI is reduced to 7 years RI. The State Government is directed to consider the case of the accused appellants for remission under section 432 IPC in accordance with law.Appeal partly allowed. *******