Conviction for conspiracy and dacoity upheld based on strong circumstantial evidence, but sentences modified to reflect leniency due to absence of physical harm in the commission of the crimes.

JUDGMENT :

M G UMA, J.

The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1634 of 2018 being accused No.3 in SC No.168 of 2011 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar (sitting at KGF), is impugning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.08.2018, convicting him for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 395 read with Section 149 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B and 395 of IPC, with default sentences.

2. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1026 of 2020 being accused No.2 in SC No.61 of 2019 before the Trial Court, is impugning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.03.2020, convicting him for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 395 and 397 read with Section 149 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 395 of IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC, with default sentences.

3. Brief facts of the case as made out by the prosecution is that, on 30.05.2011, accused Nos.1 to 11 have conspired together to commit dacoity. In furtherance of the same, accused Nos.1 to 7 made preparations, armed with deadly weapons had trespassed into the house of PWs.1 to 3 and committed dacoity of gold ornaments, silver articles, cash of Rs.54,000/- and samsung mobile phone, and gave life threat to them.

4. It is stated that accused No.3 alongwith accused No.1 sold the gold ingots to CW27 and got melted it to prepare the gold bangles, thereby caused disappearance of evidence. Accused No.2 sold the 6 gold ingots to accused No.10, which he looted along with the co-accused and sold remaining ingots to CW34 and received Rs.6,60,000/-, out of which, accused No.2 retained Rs.6,00,000/- and gave Rs.60,000/- to accused No.10. Thereby, they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 395, 397 and 201 read with Section 149 of IPC.

5. In SC No.168 of 2011, the Trial Court took cognizance of the offences and summoned the accused. The accused appeared before the Court, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 22 got marked Exs.P1 to P82 and identified MOs.1 to 73 in support of its contention. The accused have denied all the incriminating materials available on record in the statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., but not led any evidence nor got marked any documents in support of their defence. The Trial Court after taking into consideration all the materials on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution is successful in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and convicted and sentenced as stated above. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellants - accused Nos.1 and 3 have preferred Criminal Appeal No.1634 of 2018. During the pendency of appeal, appellant- accused No.1 died and the case against him stood abated vide order dated 04.04.2025.

6. During the pendency of SC No.168 of 2011, accused No.2 remained absconding and the therefore, split up charge sheet came to be filed. Hence, accused No.2 was tried by the Trial Court in SC No.61 of 2019. Accused No.2 was summoned before the Trial Court. The accused appeared before the Court and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examine