JUDGMENT : K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. Both these appeals are filed against the common judgment and order dated 26.11.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 20, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case Nos. 225 of 2006 and 394 of 2006 by the present appellants-original accused nos. 1 and 2 of Sessions Case No. 225 of 2006, who were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") and ordered to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for three months was imposed. Accused nos. 1 and 2 were also held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 392 read with Section 114 of IPC and ordered to undergo imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment of two months was imposed. Accused nos. 1 and 2 were also held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 452 read with Section 114of IPC and ordered to undergo imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment of one month was imposed. For the offence punishable under Section 135 (1) of the Bombay Police Act, accused no. 2 was ordered to undergo six months' imprisonment. All the sentences were to run concurrently. By the impugned judgment, however, original accused nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Sessions Case No. 225 of 2006 and accused of Sessions Case No. 394 of 2006 were acquitted. 2. The case of the prosecution is that one Kunjbihari Krushnalal Barot lodged a complaint stating that on 12.12.2005, the watchman and the Secretary of Ghanshyamnagar Society, Sabarmati, of which he is the Chairman, came to his house and informed him that doors of flat No. D/12 were lying open and, therefore, the servant who was working in the said flat of Chandraben entered the said flat and found that she was lying dead in a pool of blood. It was informed that throat of the deceased was slit by some sharp cutting weapon. It was also informed that safe vault of the deceased was empty. With these allegations, a complaint was lodged. It was informed that throat of the deceased was slit by some sharp cutting weapon. It was also informed that safe vault of the deceased was empty. With these allegations, a complaint was lodged. 2.1 Upon filing of the complaint, investigation was carried out and it was found that deceased Chandraben was residing alone in the said flat and she was suffering from knee problem. It was also found that she used to take medicine for this ailment from Jainam Ayurvedic Store and came in contact with Vinaybhai Kantilal Shah. In place of Mahendrabhai Barot, who was working with said Vinaybhai, his brother, Gautam Barot used to visit her home to supply her medicines, therefore, he came in contact with said Chandraben. Since she was residing alone, with an intention to commit robbery, said Gautambhai-accused no. 2, accused no. 1, accused no. 4 and one Bhikhabhai Ranchhodbhai Bavri went to her house a day before Raksha Bandhan. Since nephew of Chandraben was present at that time, the accused did not succeed in their plan. After 15 days, again the accused persons went to her house with an intention to commit robbery, however, they could not succeed as Chandraben did not open the door of the house. On 11.12.2005, accused nos. 1 to 6 and one Bhikhabhai Bavri, gathered near Usmanpura Municipal Garden and planned to commit robbery. As agreed, accused nos. 1 to 3 and 5 went to the house of the deceased with deadly weapons and accused nos. 4 and 6 and one Bhikhbhai Bavri were keeping watch in the surrounding area. Since accused no. 2 was known to the deceased, he entered the house of the deceased and started talking with her. In the meanwhile, accused nos. 1, 3 and 5 also entered her house and attacked Chandraben with deadly weapons. They slit the throat of the deceased and committed robbery of gold and silver ornaments, cash and mobile phone. Thereafter, the accused persons tried to destroy the evidence. Therefore, the accused were arrested and charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of learned Magistrate. However, as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the same committed to Sessions Court. Thereafter, charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 2.2 During the trial, the prosecution has examined following witnesses:- Sr. No. Name Exh. 1 Kunjbihari Barot, complainant. However, as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the same committed to Sessions Court. Thereafter, charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 2.2 During the trial, the prosecution has examined following witnesses:- Sr. No. Name Exh. 1 Kunjbihari Barot, complainant. 16 2 Dr. Chunilal G. Kumavat. 22 3 Anis B. Barot. 28 4 Kamlaben Jugaji Barad. 32 5 Jagdishbhai Bhavarlal Shah 33 6 Kamleshbhai B. Thakor. 42 7 Rameshbhai Umedbhai Soni. 48 8 Bharatbhai Gopaldas Soni. 50 9 Pravinbhai M. Barot. 52 10 Jayantibhai I. Thakor. 55 11 Vikramsinh A. Vaghela. 58 12 Dharmendrasinh R. Zala. 61 13 Ambalal I. Patel. 64 14 Dineshkumar B. Shah. 65 15 Dineshkumar M. Raval. 66 16 Maheshbhai M. Raval. 70 17 Shivlal P. Marwadi. 72 18 Balitaben M. Bariya. 74 19 Dalabhai Kamabhai Valand. 75 20 Ajay R. Dhiman. 76 21 Laxmiben B. Dantani. 77 22 Taraben N. Bhatiya. 78 23 Babubhai P. Nalvaya. 79 24 Vijay Shantilal Shah. 80 25 Krishnaben V. Kundiya. 83 26 Karan J Jani. 84 27 Jitendra Nagindas Modi 85 28 Chandansinh N. Rajput, PI. 87 29 Dhirenbhai J. Laliya. 90 30 Kanubhai D. Parmar. 92 31 Ramanand N. Pasvan. 97 32 Devdutt P. Chakravarty. 100 33 Dharmesh H. Mistry. 103 34 Prabhudas V. Kotval, IO. 106 35 Kishorsinh B. Zala, PI. 141 2.3 The prosecution has also produced and relied upon following documentary evidence:- Sr. No. Description Exh. 1 Original complaint. 17 2 PM note. 23 3 Yadi for the treatment of accused-Vijay. 25 4 Case papers of accused-Vijay. 26 5 Certificate regarding treatment of accused Vijay. 27 6 Panchnama of the place of offence. 29 7 Panch slips of muddamal articles 1 to 7. 30 8 Panchnama of scooter GBX 4456 used in the offence. 34 9 Inquest panchnama. 35 10 Panchnama of Tata Indicom phone of the deceased. 36 11 Panchnama of clothes of deceased. 37 12 Panchnama of the papers recovered form the house of the decease. 38 13 Yadi of address and phone number of Tata phone. 39 14 Panchnama of the articles recovered from the house of Ashok Dantani. 40 15 Panchnama of recovery of ornaments from accused-Vijay. 43 16 Panch slips of muddamal articles 31-1 to 31-7. 44 17 Panch slips of muddamal articles 31-4 to 23. 45 18 Panch slip of muddamal article-tin. 38 13 Yadi of address and phone number of Tata phone. 39 14 Panchnama of the articles recovered from the house of Ashok Dantani. 40 15 Panchnama of recovery of ornaments from accused-Vijay. 43 16 Panch slips of muddamal articles 31-1 to 31-7. 44 17 Panch slips of muddamal articles 31-4 to 23. 45 18 Panch slip of muddamal article-tin. 46, 47 19 Bill of Umedbhai Jewellers. 49 20 Bill of Radhe Krishna Jewellers showing weight and price of four different ornaments. 51 21 Panchnama of the articles recovered from the house of accused Gautam. 53 22 Panchnama of hair cut of the accused. 56 23 Panch slips of muddamal article 38 to 43. 57 24 Panchnama of the articles recovered from accused Vijay, Gautam, Amit. 59 25 Panch slips of muddamal article 25 to 27. 60 26 Panchnama of seizure of knife and clothes. 62 27 Panch slips of muddamal article 45 to 49. 63 28 Panchnama of seizure of gold chain and ear rings sold by accused-Vijay. 67 29 Panch slips of muddamal article 32. 68, 69 30 Panchnama of physical condition of the accused. 71 31 Panchnama of the phone call made by Mehul to Vijay. 73 32 BSNL Bill of Jitendrakumar. 86 33 Certificate regarding mobile no. 98798 13595 given by Vodafone. 91 34 Yadi for getting print outs of mobile no.98240 12432. 93 35 Print outs of mobile nos. 98240 12432 & 98245 79604. 94 36 Documents with regard to BSNL mobile bill. 98 2.4 At the end of trial, the Court below recorded further statements of the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and thereafter, passed the impugned judgment and order awarding the sentence, as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of the trial Court, present appeals are preferred by the accused before this Court. 3. Mr. Bhargav Mehta and Mrs. Rekha Kapadia, learned advocates appearing for the appellants-original accused nos. 1 and 2 have taken us through the evidence on record and submitted that the impugned judgment and order is against the evidence on record. It is submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. It is also submitted that a false case is filed against the accused and they are wrongly roped in. 1 and 2 have taken us through the evidence on record and submitted that the impugned judgment and order is against the evidence on record. It is submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. It is also submitted that a false case is filed against the accused and they are wrongly roped in. It is further submitted that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has not proved the complete chain of events, therefore, the trial Court has committed an error in convicting the accused persons. It is also submitted that many goldsmiths have turned hostile. It is also submitted that one of the crucial witnesses, Inspector Rajput, has admitted in his deposition that he did not note down any vardhi or information which he received regarding the accused persons gathering at Naranpura. By taking us through the evidence of Sushil Chmpalal Soni, PW-14, it is submitted that this witness in his cross-examination has stated that he did not remember the names of the persons, who had come to his shop for selling or purchasing the ornaments. It is submitted that the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and merely on the basis of arrest panchnama and discovery of knives and ornaments, it would not be appropriate to convict the accused persons. It is also contended that there are corrections in the medical certificate on which reliance is placed by the trial Court, therefore, it may not be believed. It is also submitted that as per the FSL report, no blood was found on the ring and pant of accused no. 1. It is also contended that looking to the young age of the accused and considering the fact that they belong to poor families, benefit of doubt is required to be granted to the accused persons. It is submitted that there is no eye witness to the incident and the accused are wrongly roped in and they are wrongly convicted by the trial Court. In view of above, it is submitted that the appellants ought to have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them and prayed that this appeals may be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment. 4. On the other hand, Ms. In view of above, it is submitted that the appellants ought to have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them and prayed that this appeals may be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment. 4. On the other hand, Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the State has submitted that the order of conviction recorded against the accused is just and proper and she has supported the conviction recorded by impugned judgment. She submitted that the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and convicted the accused. She has taken us through the evidence and contended that the trial Court has not committed any error in convicting the accused because as many as 35 witnesses were examined and 66 documents were produced in support of the prosecution case. She has taken us through the evidence of Sushil Champalalji Soni, PW-14, a goldsmith. This witness had deposed in his evidence that the accused had come to him and sold ear rings and gold chain. Thereafter, when the police inquired from him, this witness had handed over gold chain and ear rings to the police. He also identified accused no. 1 in the Court. She also took us through panchnama, Exh.62, wherein it is stated that at the instance of accused no. 1, knives used in the offence and clothes of the accused have been recovered. Similarly, Exh.67 is the panchnama of recovery of gold ear rings and gold chain at the instance of the accused. Similarly, she took us through Exh.71 which is panchnama of the physical condition of the accused. She also relied on the evidence of Karan Jayantikumar Jani, PW-26, niece of the deceased. This witness has identified accused no. 2 before the Court as he used to come to the house of the deceased for giving medicines. She further submitted that accused no. 2 was frequently visiting the house of the deceased and he was aware that the deceased was residing alone and she was suffering from knee problem. She submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused persons. Therefore, she submitted that the trial Court has rightly convicted accused nos. 1 and 2 and these Criminal Appeals filed by the accused may be dismissed. 5. We have heard Mr. Bhargav Mehta and Mrs. Rekha Kapadia, learned advocates for the appellants-accused and Ms. She submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused persons. Therefore, she submitted that the trial Court has rightly convicted accused nos. 1 and 2 and these Criminal Appeals filed by the accused may be dismissed. 5. We have heard Mr. Bhargav Mehta and Mrs. Rekha Kapadia, learned advocates for the appellants-accused and Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the State. We have also gone through the impugned judgment and the evidence on record. From the evidence on record, it is clear that accused no. 2 was knowing the deceased and he was aware that she is a retired government employee. He was also aware that the deceased was residing alone and was suffering from knee problem. Therefore, the accused thought that if she is attacked, she will not be in a position to defend herself or ask for help. Keeping this in mind, accused no. 2 along with other accused person planned to commit robbery at the place of the deceased. It has also come in evidence that earlier also they attempted twice to commit the robbery but they succeeded. On the first occasion, nephew of the deceased was present and at the second time, they could not open the door of the flat. In the third attempt, they remained successful. The police could not have detected the crime, however, unfortunately for the accused, they were arrested from a public place with ornaments, as per the deposition of PW-12. The accused could not explain as to how they came into possession of these ornaments, nor any bill or other documents were produced in this regard before the Court. PW-25, Krishna, niece of the deceased identified said ornaments and stated that these ornaments are belonging to the deceased. It is a fact that so far as original accused Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the entire case rests on the circumstantial evidence. Much have been argued by learned advocate, Mr. Mehta for Mr. Bharda, learned advocate for the appellant No. 1-original accused No. 1 and Ms. Rekhaben, learned advocate for appellant No. 2-original accused No. 2 that no evidence has been forthcoming on the record as to whether anyone has seen original accused Nos. 1 and 2 entering into the house of the deceased. It is to be noted that as per the place shown by original accused Nos. Rekhaben, learned advocate for appellant No. 2-original accused No. 2 that no evidence has been forthcoming on the record as to whether anyone has seen original accused Nos. 1 and 2 entering into the house of the deceased. It is to be noted that as per the place shown by original accused Nos. 1 and 2 in presence of the panchas, muddamal weapon and clothes have been recovered. Moreover, ornaments had been recovered as per the panchnama at Exh.44 while knives and clothes had been recovered as per panchnama at Exh.62. We, therefore, find some force in the submission made by learned advocate for the accused that if we consider the deposition of the panchas, it cannot be said that said panchnamas had been duly proved under section 27of the Indian Evidence Act, but it is a fact that as per the place shown by the accused, ornaments had been recovered and the said ornaments had been identified by the independent witness, PW-13 as well as PW-14. Thus, the prosecution has duly proved that the ornaments which had been recovered by the recovery panchnama were of deceased Chandraben and accordingly, the said circumstance has gone against the accused. Likewise, the knives had been recovered from Usmanpura Garden as per the panchnama at Exh.62 and out of the said knives, on one of the knives, the blood of blood group of the deceased had been found as per the FSL report. The said muddamal i.e. knives and clothes had been recovered from the place as shown by the accused. Though it is the fact that so far as the knife related to original accused No. 2 is concerned, the panch witness has not much supported, but it has been proved that during the course of investigation, the police had arrested original accused No. 2 entering into the Chawl of R.R. Shukla and considering the deposition of Investigating Officer, the said panchnamas have been proved. Even if it cannot be considered that the said discovery was made under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, but it is a fact that vide said panchnama, the clothes had been recovered and on the clothes of original accused No. 2, the blood of the blood group of the deceased had been found and thus, naturally this is a strong circumstance going against original accused Nos. 1 and 2 which had been discussed at length by the trial court in the impugned judgment. In view of this, we are of the opinion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused nos. 1 and 2 and it cannot give rise to any other conclusion except that the accused are guilty of the offence. Therefore, in our view, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused and the trial Court has not committed any error in convicting the accused nos. 1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 of IPC and other alleged offences. Therefore, these appeals are required to be dismissed. 6. For the foregoing reasons, both these Criminal Appeals are dismissed. The impugned judgment and order dated 26.11.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 20, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 225 of 2006 is hereby confirmed. At this stage, learned advocates appearing for the appellants-accused nos. 1 and 2 of Sessions Case No. 225 of 2006 requested that the accused may be given benefit of remission after completion of requisite period. Therefore, it is observed that upon completion of 14 years' imprisonment, the State Government may consider the case of the appellants-accused nos. 1 and 2 for remission. The period of sentence already undergone by accused nos. 1 and 2 be given set off to them. Bail bond, if any, of the accused stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent to the Court below forthwith.