Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Aadam @ Javed @ Aamad Siddikbhai on 17 April, 2015
Author: Anant S.Dave
Bench: Anant S. Dave, G.R.Udhwani
R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 336 of 2007
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 337 of 2007
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 338 of 2007
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 339 of 2007
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 340 of 2007
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1079 of 2008
With
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2033 of 2010
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
=============================================
==
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
=============================================
==
THE STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s)
Versus
AADAM @ JAVED @ AAMAD SIDDIKBHAI
SANDHI....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
=============================================
==
Appearance:
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 336 OF 2007
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 337 OF 2007
Page 1 of 20
R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 338 OF 2007
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant
RULE NOT RECD for the Respondent.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 339 OF 2007
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant
NOTICE SERVED to Respondents-1 & 4.
MR YJ PATEL for Respondent-2
MR CHIRAG H PAREKH for Respondent-3
MR PP MAJMUDAR for Respondent-2
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 340 OF 2007
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant
MR PRATIK BAROT (HCLS COMMITTEE) for Respondent-1.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1079 OF 2008
MR PRATIK BAROT (HCLS COMMITTEE) for the Appellant
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2033 OF 2010
MR HARSHIT S TOLIA & MR PARTH S TOLIA for the Appellant
MR JK SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent.
=============================================
==
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
Date : 17/04/2015
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE)
1. This group of appeals arises out of the judgement and order dated 11.12.2006 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dhragandhra in Sessions Case Nos. 18 of 2006, 16 of 2006 and 19 of 2006.
2. Criminal Appeal Nos. 336 of 2007 and 340 of 2007 has been preferred by the State of Gujarat for enhancement of sentence awarded to accused Aadam @ Page 2 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi (original accused No.1 in Sessions Case No. 18 of 2006) and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki (original accused NO.1 of Sessions Case No.16 of 2006) passed vide the impugned judgement dated 11.12.2006.
3. Criminal Appeal Nos. 337 of 2007, 338 of 2007 and 339 of 2007 has been preferred by the State of Gujarat against the order of acquittal passed vide the impugned judgement dated 11.12.2006.
4. Criminal Appeal Nos. 1079 of 2008 and 2033 of 2010 has been preferred by the accused Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki (original accused NO.1 of Sessions Case No.16 of 2006) and Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi (original accused No.1 in Sessions Case No. 18 of 2006) against the conviction recorded against them and sentence imposed vide the impugned judgement and order dated 11.12.2006.
5. The learned Judge convicted Aadam @Javed @ Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi, original accused No.1 of Sessions Case No.18 of 2006 (respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 2007) and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki, original accused No.1 of Session Case No.16 of 2006 (respondent in Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 2007) for the offences under Sections 394 read with Section 114 of IPC and ordered to suffer R.I. Page 3 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT of 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default further to undergo simple imprisonment of one year whereas acquitted for the other charges.
6. The learned Judge except accused Aadam @Javed @ Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki, all other accused persons of Sessions Case NO. 16/2006, 18/2006 and 19/2006 were acquitted for the offences under Sections 394, 397, 114 of Indian Penal Code as well as Section 25 (1) (b) (a) and 27 of Arms Act.
7. That facts in short giving rise to the present appeals are as under:
7.1. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of incident i.e. on 10.11.2004 at about 12.30 hours at noon, complainant Bharatbhai Umedbhai Joshi and employees of State Bank of Saurashtra, Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari, an employee of Indian Railway, Halvad went to deposit cash worth Rs.14,50,388/- in State Bank of Saurashtra, Halvad and while going towards Bank, the complainant was having this cash in his cotton bag and it was kept on carrier of the cycle. It is further the case of prosecution that at about 12.30 hours, when aforementioned persons came to the State Bank of Saurashtra, Halvad, one black coloured motor bike came from behind with two pillion riders. That said two accused persons intercepted complainant and other persons with a Page 4 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT view to commit robbery of cash of Rs.14,50,388/- and one of them fired from country made Tamancha in air with a view to create fear in the mind of complainant and others.
It is further the case of prosecution that there after, the accused persons had asked for cotton bag containing cash and started giving kick and fist blows to the points-man Shri Govindbhai. As a result of this assault, Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari, who was accompanying had fallen down and thereafter complainant had tried to remove cotton bag containing cash from the carrier of the cycle and making an attempt to run away with said bag. In the meantime, respondents-accused gave push to the complainant and as a result of which complainant had also fallen down and thereafter accused snatched away bag containing cash of Rs.14,50,388/-. While trying to run away from the place of incident, the respondent accused had also fired from his country made Tamancha. Thus, in all respondent accused had committed offence under Sections 394, 397, 114 of Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 25 (1) (b) (a) of Arms Act. Therefore, aforesaid complaint was filed before Halvad Police Station, which was registered at C.R.No.I-87 of 2004.
7.2. The police recorded the statement of witnesses and after thorough investigation as there was a sufficient evidence connecting the respondents for crime produced in this case, charge sheet was filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Halvad.
Page 5 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT7.3. It is further the case of prosecution that at the relevant point of time, accused Aamad @ Javed @ Aamad Siddikbhai, Divyarajsinh @ Lakki Rajsinh Bihari and Kailassing s/o Gurumukhsing Shikh Sardarji Sikligar were absconding and therefore, three different charge-sheet were submitted and accordingly three different criminal cases were registered against respondents which were committed to the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhrangadhra and numbered as Sessions Case No. 16/2006, 18/2006 and 19/2006.
8. Before trial Court, charges were read over to the respondents, wherein the respondents have not pleaded guilty to the charges levelled against them and claimed to be tried. Before trial Court the prosecution has examined complainant, panch witnesses and police witnesses who were supporting to the case of prosecution. The prosecution has also relied upon the documentary evidence in support of oral evidence laid by prosecution before the trial Court.
9. The appellant submits that all the Sessions Cases arises out of C.R.No.I-87/2004 registered before Halvad Police Station, and therefore, all the three cases namely Sessions Case Nos. 16/2006, 18/2006 and 19/2006 were tried together and consolidated evidence of all the Sessions Case and recorded in Sessions Case No.16/2006.
Page 6 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT10. The prosecution has produced the following documents to prove its case and the same have been adduced by us:
INDEX Sr. Exh.' Particulars Page Nos.
No. s 5 10 Charge 47 to 52 12 18 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 273 to No.1 Bharatbhai Umedbhai Joshi 286 13 19 Report of FIR and Sections added 287 to and Report regarding name of the 298 accused not to be considered as accused 14 20 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 299 to No.2 Dineshbhai Jagdishbhai 302 15 21 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 303 to No.3 Rajeshbhai Prabhudasbhai 306 16 22 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 307 to No.4 Parakramsingh Pravinsingh 310 Zala 18 24 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 315 to No.5 Khetabhai Bhagvanbhai 318 Bhavad 19 25 Mark 16/3 Panchnama of 3199 to Rs.25,000/- seized from witness 320 Vivek Rajkumar 20 26 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 321 to No.6 Jhalabhai Maiyabhai Bharvad 324 21 27 Deposition of Prosecution Witness 325 to No.7 Bachubhai Hussainbahi 328 Sanghini Page 7 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT 22 28 Deposition of Prosecution witness 329 to No.8 Kamabhai Somjibhai Koli 332 23 29 Deposition of Prosecution witness 333 to No.9 Paresh Mugatlal Raval 338 24 30 Mark 16/5 panchnama of 339 to Demonstration at scene of offence 344 25 31 Deposition of Prosecution witness 345 to NO.10 Kanjibhai Tribhovanbhai Patel 348 26 32 Deposition of Prosecution witness 349 to No.11 Prabatbhai Libabhai Rabari 352 27 33 Deposition of Prosecution witness 353 to No.12 Laljibhai Gadhubhai Rabari 356 28 34 Deposition of Prosecution witness 357 to No. 13 Rasikbhai Becharbhai Patel 360 29 35 Deposition of prosecution witness 361 to No. 14 Bannabhai Anadabhai Koli 364 30 36 Deposition of prosecution witness 365 to No.15 Govindbhai Sangrambhai 370 Rabari 31 37 Deposition of prosecution witness 371 to No.16 Prabhudas Laxmanbhai Patel 376 32 38 Deposition of prosecution witness 377 to No.17 Velambhai Vajabhai Nayak 380 33 39 Deposition of prosecution witness 381 to No.18 Ashokgiri Ramgiri Goswami 384 34 40 Deposition of prosecution witness 385 to No.19 Jayeshkumar Kanajibhai Patel 388 35 41 Mark 16/10 panchnama of seized 389 to muddamal of Rs.160000/- 390 36 42 Deposition of prosecution witness 391 to No. 20 Shardul Hira Bhagvanbhai 398 Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate of T.I.Parade 38 44 Panchnama of T.I. parade 401 to 408 Page 8 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT 39 45 Deposition of prosecution witness 409 to No. 21 Vishnukarshibhai Mistry 414 40 46 Deposition of prosecution witness 415 to No. 22 Yogirajsinh Ajitsinh Zala 418 41 47 Deposition of prosecution witness 419 to No.23 Sushilkumar Ramkripal Lal 422 Karan 42 48 Deposition of prosecution witness 423 to No. 24 Aalarkhbhai Yakubbhai 424 Dhachi 43 49 Deposition of prosecution witness 425 to No.25 Mahipal Bharatsinh Tank 430 44 50 Affidavit of Mahipalbhai Bharatsinh 431 to Tank 434 45 51 Deposition of prosecution witness 435 to No.26 Jayeshkumar Girdharlal Soni 438 46 52 Mark 16/20 bill of Soni Jayeshkumar 435 to Girdharlal 440 47 53 Deposition of prosecution witness 441 to No.27 Kantibhai Ishwarbhai Patel 446 48 54 Deposition of prosecution witness 447 to No.28 Dr.Ashwin Ramniklal Aadoja 452 50 56 Mark 16/18 Injury certificate of 455 to Govindbhai Sangrambhai 456 51 57 Case paper of Govinbhai 457 to Sangrambhai 458 52 58 Mark 16/19 Injury certificate of 459 to Bharatbhai Umedbhai 460 53 59 Case paper of Bharatbhai Umedbhai 461 to 462 54 60 Deposition of prosecution witness 463 to No.29 Mahavirsingh Chandrasingh 468 Vaghela 55 61 Deposition of prosecution witness 469 to No.30 Bharatsingh Madhavsingh 476 Tank Page 9 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT 56 62 Mark 16/1 Panchnama of local scene 477 to of offence 480 57 63 Mark 16/21 copy of FIR of Halvad 481 to Police Station C.R.No.I 88 of 2004 484 59 68 Deposition of prosecution witness 487 to No.31 Sureshchandra Govindbhai 506 Barochiya 63 72 Mark 16/7 Panchnama of scene of 513 to offence 516 Page 10 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT
11. Mr. J.K.Shah, learned APP appearing for the appellant- State of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal Nos. 336/2007 and 340/2007 for enhancement of sentence submits that the learned Judge has failed to appreciate the fact that while trying to commit offence of robbery, the respondents- accused (Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi of Sessions Case No.18/2006 and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki of Sessions Case No.16/2006) has taken away the public money, which is very henious. He further submits that the trial Judge failed to appreciate the sentence provided under Section 394 of IPC which provides that it shall be punishable with imprisonment for a life or with RI for a term, which may extent to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine for such crime. Learned APP therefore submits that the reasons given by learned Judge while awarding lesser sentence upon the accused are general in nature and therefore, same do not require to be accepted while awarding lesser sentence. In fact a strict view ought to have been taken by learned Judge while imposing sentence upon the accused.
11.1. Mr.J.K.Shah, learned APP contends that the punishment imposed upon accused (Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi of Sessions Case No.18/2006 and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki of Sessions Case No.16/2006) is on a lower side and considering the gravity of offence, this Court may Page 11 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT enhance the sentence imposed upon them.
12. Mr. J.K.Shah, learned APP appearing for the appellant- State of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal Nos. 337/2007, 338/2007 and 339/2007 submits that the learned Judge has not properly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence and thereby committed error by acquitting respondents (Divyarajsinh @ Lakkiraj Narendrasinh Rathod, original accused No.2 of Sessions Case No.18/2006, Kailashsing s/o Gurumukhsing Shikh Sardarji Sikligar, original accused of Sessions Case No.19/2006, Ibrahimbhai Kasambhai Miyana, Dharabhai Karnabhai Chu.Koli, Rajeshbhai Jivanbhai Rathod, Hasambhai Kasambhai Miyana, original accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Sessions Case No. 16/2006). He further states that the learned Judge has failed to appreciate the facts of the case that prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt by way of evidence of complainant Bharatbhai, injured Govindbhai and Prabhubhai Laxmanbhai Patel. It is the evidence of all these witnesses, which gets corroborated to the incident in question, inspite of the fact, the learned Judge observed minor omissions and contradictions committed error in acquitting the respondents. He further states that in all prosecution has examined 31 witnesses and out of which injured complainant Bharatbhai Umedbhai Joshi has been examined at Exh. 18, Govindbhai Sangrambhai at Exh.36, employee of the railway and eye witness Prabhudas Laxmanbhai Patel at Exh.37, Sardul Bhagwan at Exh.42, Page 12 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT Sushilkumar Ramkripal, Railway Station Master, Halvad at Exh.47 and Mahipal Bharatsing Tank at Exh. 49. All these prosecution witnesses fully supported the prosecution case. Inspite of the above fact, learned Judge committed error in acquitting respondents.
13. Mr. Harshit Tolia and Mr.Pratik Barot, learned advocates appearing for the appellants-accused in Criminal Appeal No.1079/2008 and Criminal Appeal No.2033/2010 (Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi of Sessions Case No.18/2006 and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki of Sessions Case No.16/2006) jointly submits that looking to the papers it is clear that the witnesses have not clearly stated that whether the firearm is a pistol or revolver and the said firearm is not recovered. Even the deposition of the doctor do not inspire confidence so as to convict the appellants (Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi of Sessions Case No.18/2006 and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki of Sessions Case No.16/2006) for the offence in question. They further state that the statement of complainant is not corroborating the evidence on record and the statement of witnesses are having material contradictions regarding usage of weapon by the appellants-accused. Even T.I. Parade is defective and to be discarded. It is stated that the learned Judge has mainly discussed the statement of witnesses and has not given reasoning for the same and Page 13 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT therefore, the impugned judgement and order dated 11.12.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions and District Judge, Dhragandhra is illegal convicting appellants and contrary to evidence and has resulted into miscarriage of justice to the appellants and is required to be quashed and set aside.
14. In view of submissions made by learned advocates appearing for the parties and all appeals are heard together with prayers therein namely, setting aside conviction, setting aside acquittal and enhancement of sentence, evidence of injured PW's and medical officer are necessary to be looked into.
14.1.Bharatbhai Umedbhai Joshi, PW-1 Exh.18, a booking cum luggage clerk working at Railway Station, Halvad stated about procedure to be followed of depositing cash amount with State Bank of Saurashtra, Halvad Branch in view of strategic location of Halvad which is surrounded by salt deposits and traders depositing such cash amount with railway authority. On the day of incident he along with points-man Shri Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari had gone at State Bank of Saurashtra, Halvad Branch on bicycle, a bag containing cash of RS.14,50,388/- was placed and suddenly they were chased by two persons on a motorbike from behind and stopped the two wheeler in front of them and fired in the air. That reluctance on his part resulted into scuffle and once again firing had taken Page 14 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT place. The complainant was given a push and was injured by butt of revolver. Similar treatment was given to points- man Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari. He further states that he had taken treatment at Government Hospital, Halvad and thereafter at Dhragandhra and later on shifted to Railway Station at Sabarmati, Ahmedabad. In detail, he has described presence of accused and further in T.I. parade identified before Executive Magistrate and Mamlatdar and confirmed in his testimony.
14.2.That another injured eye witness Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari PW-15, Exh.36 and Prabhudas Laxmanbhai Patel PW-16 Exh.37 also narrates the very incident in the manner what is described by PW-1 and they were also injured by blunt substance and became unconscious thereafter. In his cross-examination he denies any irregularities in T.I. parade and identifies the accused in the Court. That, other eye witness Prabhudas Laxmanbhai Patel PW-16 Exh.37, a customer who had gone along with his friend Anilkumar Trambaklal Raval at State Bank of Saurashtra for encashing the cheque and while coming out of the bank had seen scuffle between four persons and noticed firing by the accused. The above witness was also threatened and noticed accused escaping on motorbike. In cross-examination the above PW confirms procedure followed in T.I. parade and identifies the accused in the Court.
Page 15 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT15. In continuation of appreciation of evidence of injured eye witnesses including complainant and other eye witnesses with documentary evidence of case papers, submissions made by learned advocates appearing for the parties, it is true that main accused namely, Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi, Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki and Divyarajsinh @ Lakkiraj Narendrasinh Rathod were arrested by way of transfer warrant issued by learned Magistrate of Halvad. That upon information received from Jamnagar 'B' Division police station Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki was arrested on 9.5.2005 and his T.I. parade was held on 11.5.2005 after following due procedure by Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate and thereafter demonstration panchnama of scene of offence was drawn on 14.5.2005. Likewise, Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi was brought on 10.9.2005 by way of transfer warrant from Rajkot upon a message received on 29.8.2005 and demonstration panchnama was drawn on 12.9.2005 and T.I. parade was held on 17.9.2005. Both the above accused were identified and even later on in the Court also by eye witnesses including injured eye witnesses. Likewise, Divyarajsinh @ Lakkiraj Narendrasinh Rathod was brought by way of transfer warrant from Chotta Udaipur on 5.9.2005.
16. As per description of persons committing crime as registered and in view of intelligence information, the Page 16 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT accused came to be arrested. The prosecution could succeed in establishing guilt of the accused by examining Bharat Joshi, the complainant PW-1 Exh.18 who was having injury on elbow having injury mark of 1/1/0.5 cm as per injury certificate at Exh.58 and deposed by Dr. Ashwin Ramniklal Aadroja PW 28 Exh.54 who was Medical Officer at Halvad Government Hospital. Likewise, serious injuries on parietal region on a person named Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari with measurement of 6.2 cm was treated by the very Doctor and later on shifted to Morbi Civil Hospital having injury certificate at Exh.56 came to be confirmed in testimony with possibility of such injury by blunt substance including butt of the revolver.
16.1. Bharatbhi Umedbhai Joshi and Govindbhai Sangrambhai Rabari injured eye witnesses and an employee of Indian Railway, both deposed about manner in which crime was committed and also identified the accused at two stages namely before Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate, Halvad and also in the Court. Apart from both the above eye witnesses, two other independent eye witnesses namely Prabhudas Laxmanbhai Patel PW-17 Exh.37 and Anilkumar Trambaklal Raval who were coming out of the Bank, at the scene of offence and Govindbhai and Bharatbhai being assaulted by two accused persons, who also identified them in due course. The Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate namely, Shardul Hira Bhagvanbhai PW-20 Page 17 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT Exh.42 confirmed procedure of T.I.Parade in accordance with law, for which, no major lacuna appears if considered in juxtaposition to testimonies of injured eye witnesses and other eye witnesses of identifying accused persons. Even, depositing cash amount of Rs.14 lakhs by salt trader, Allarakha Yakubbhai Dhachi with Railway's has come on record.
16.2.One more circumstance which was proved substantially of prosecution was recovery of amount of Rs.1,60,000/- out of total amount of crime proceed and was given by accused to one Mahipal Tank PW-25 to a person named Narpatsingh Bapu of Shehra, District:
Panchmahal to multiply the amount as promised and out of Rs.2,00,000 of which Rs.1,60,000/- was recovered for which affidavit was executed. Though denial appears on the part of PW-25 about name of the persons from whom he has received but he had confirmed having given such amount to Narpatsingh. The fact of involvement of two main accused namely Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki in various similar offences and their arrest after three months, however, is well supported by identification parade, statements of injured eye witnesses including complainant and other eye witnesses namely, customer of the bank , injuries of injured so deposed by medical officer of Halvad Government Hospital and in the testimonies of Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate of Halvad for Page 18 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT appreciating such evidence, learned trial Judge has committed no error, though the manner in which the judgement is written need to be taken care on administrative side.
17. In absence of any major contradictions, discrepancies or improvements in testimonies of witnesses resulting into creating doubt over prosecution case as highly improbable or unbelievable, it cannot be said that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, warranting interference by the appellate court as prayed for by respective appellants in their appeals against setting aside conviction, acquittal or for even enhancement.
17.1.We are neither persuaded by arguments of learned APP to enhance sentence awarded to two accused of Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 2007 and Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 2007 filed by the State against Aadam @ Javed Aamad Siddikbhai Sandhi and Mahendra @ Tako Salim Narayanbhai Lavjibhai Valmiki nor for setting aside acquittal of the accused and also by submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants-convict to set aside the conviction and sentence for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000 and in default one year S.I., and accordingly, all criminal appeals arising out of judgement and order dated 11.12.2006 in Sessions Case Nos. 16/2006, 18/2006 and 19/2006 by learned Page 19 of 20 R/CR.A/336/2007 CAV JUDGMENT Additional Sessions Judge, Dhragandhra are hereby rejected.
18. R & P to be sent back to the trial court forthwith.
(ANANT S.DAVE, J.) (G.R.UDHWANI, J.) SMITA Page 20 of 20