Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In S.T.No.1166 of 2006(Crime No. 359 of 2005), appellant Sandeep Rawat alias Panta has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 395,397 and 412 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to him under Section 395 I.P.C. is ten years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months additional imprisonment.

The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. That on the basis of the evidence available on record the offence for which the accused has been convicted is not made out. That the applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor he was put up for identification and there is no evidence to connect him with the crime in question. That only evidence against him is the alleged recovery of golden bangles. It has further been contended that the alleged recovery is also doubtful as arrest of the applicant after which recovery is said to have been made out was held doubtful in the judgment of S.T.No.896 of 2006 wherein the appellant was acquitted. It is also submitted that P.W.-1 Smt. Vinita Chandra has stated in her evidence that applicant was previously known to her but even then applicant was not named in the F.I.R. That the appellant was on bail during trial and there is nothing on record to show that he has misused the liberty of bail and he has every hope of success in appeal.

28.1.2010/Tripathi
                                                                 Court No.5


                      Criminal Appeal No.2946 of 2009
Arif alias Modi                                                ...Appellant
                                     Vs.
The State of U.P.                                       .........Opp. Party


Hon'ble Vedpal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the prayer for bail, learned A.G. A. and perused the record of the case.

In S.T.No.1167 of 2006(Crime No.359 of 2005), appellant Arif alias Modi has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 395,397 and 412 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to him under Section 395 I.P.C. is ten years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months additional imprisonment.

28.1.2010
Tripathi
                                                               Court No.5
                     Criminal Appeal No.3026 of 2009
Raju                                                        ...Appellant
                                    Vs.
The State of U.P.                                         .........Opp. Party
Hon'ble Vedpal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the prayer for bail, learned A.G. A. and perused the record of the case.

In S.T.No.1166 of 2006(Crime No. 359 of 2005), the appellant Raju has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 395, 397 and 412 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to him under Section 395 I.P.C. is ten years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months additional imprisonment.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants on the prayer for bail, learned A.G. A. and perused the record of the case.

In S.T.No.1166 of 2006(Crime No.359 of 2005), the appellants Javed and Sharik Hussain@ Poot @ Pootar have been convicted and sentenced under Sections 395 and 397 I.P.C. The maximum sentence awarded to them under Section 395 I.P.C. is ten years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months additional imprisonment.