( 1 ) IN Sessions Case No. 78/91, accused A1, A5, A6, A7, A8 and A10 were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge under Section 395, Indian Penal Code and they were sentenced to ten years imprisonment. They were also fined with Rs. 5,000. 00 each, in default they have to undergo two years simple imprisonment. A motor car No. APG 6689 which allegedly was used in the commission of offence was confiscated under Section 452, Cr. P. C. Three different appeals have been filed. One is filed on behalf of A1 and A5, another is filed by A6, A7, A8 and A10, and the third appeal is filed against the order of confiscation of vehicle by A5. All the appeals were taken together for hearing, arguments were heard and they are decided by this common judgment.

( 2 ) THERE were ten accused in all who were sent to the Court for facing the trial. During the pendency of trial two accused A4 and A9 absconded, charge was split and a separate S. C. No. 4/93 was registered against them. A2 and A3 also absconded, their case was also split up and another case S. C. No. 5493 was registered against A2 and A3. The present judgment of the trial Court concerns only accused A1, A5, A6, A7, A8 and A10. The prosecution proceeded on the following factual matrix.

( 3 ) THAT, on 1/10/1990 A1 to A10 armed with sticks and knives attacked the house of one Gudipati Veeraiah, broke open the doors by throwing boulders, trespassed into the house, tied Veeraiah and his sons Anil Kumar and Sunil Kumar with a rope and took away cash, gold and silver ornaments worth Rs. 31,000. 00. They were masked at the time of attack. They spoke Telugu, but one of them was speaking Hindi. They also attempted theft in the house of one Laxminarayana who was neighbour of the victim, but could not succeed as the inmates of that house raised alarm. While leaving the scene of occurrence the accused beat Laxminarayana who tried to intercept the offenders. He received knife injuries. F. I. R. was registered as Crime No. 142/90 by Station House Officer and the investigation started. The Circle Inspector of Police visited the scene of occurrence, drew up observation report in presence of two mediators, recorded statement of witnesses and made efforts to apprehend the accused. On 21/11/1990 C. I. of Police. Suryapet while investigating some other cases apprehended A6, A7, A8, A9 and A10. During the interrogation the accused A6 to A10 confessed that they along with A1 to A5 had committed the dacoity at Huzurnagar on the night of 1/10/1990 at 1. 00 a. m. They also stated that the stolen property had been taken away by A1 to A5, A6 to A10 further confessed that A1 to A5 who belong to Guntur had engaged a car to go over to Huzurnagar with an intention to commit the offence. Basing on the disclosures made by A6 to A10 the police kept vigil over the movements of offenders hailing from Guntur and on 8/12/1990 at 9. 00 a. m. A1 to A5 were apprehended at Munagala while they were travelling in Ambassador car APG 6689 which was proceeding towards Hyderabad on National High way No. 9. They voluntarily confessed about their involvement in the offence in presence of mediators. According to the prosecution, an Alwyn watch and one gold Nallapoosala golusu was recovered from A1, one pair of gold bangles, 8 gold nose sticks and one ladies HMT wrist watch was recovered from the possession of A3. One pusthalathadu and a wrist watch was recovered from the possession of A2, 4 gold rings were recovered from A4, 2 gold chains and 5 gold ear studs were recovered from the possession of A5 under a panchanama in presence of mediators. The accused were then remanded to judicial custody, A6 to A10 who had been arrested at Suryapet were also brought and remanded to judicial custody. Accordingly, the charge sheet was filed.

( 4 ) THE evidence of each of the witness is not needed to be considered in view of peculiar circumstances of the case. This has been all along the case of the prosecution as well as the complainant