1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order on sentence dated 31st May, 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Appellant and the co-accused for offences punishable under section 392/397/34 IPC. Learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced the Appellant and the co-accused to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The co-accused Mohd. Aslam had already served the sentence awarded to him by the learned Trial Court thus Crl. Appeal No. 503/2000 preferred by him stands disposed of as infructuous vide order dated 17th May, 2012.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is based upon conjunctures and surmises and is bad in law as well as on facts. The learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the factual matrix of the case and ignored the principles of criminal jurisprudence. The conviction of the Appellant is based solely upon the testimony of PW1 Sumitra Devi. This witness has identified the Appellant and the co-acc