JUDGMENT :

J.B.PARDIWALA, J.

1. As all the three captioned Criminal Appeals arise from a common judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. The appellants (original accused persons) call in question the legality and validity of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, Godhra, Panchmahals, dated 11th October 2005 in the Sessions Cases Nos.54 and 184 of 2004 respectively.

3. The appellants were put on trial in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Fast Track Court, Godhra, Panchmahals, for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 435, 436, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

4. On conclusion of the trial, the trial court convicted all the appellants for the offences enumerated above.

5. For the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants came to be sentenced to undergo 10 years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000=00 each, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 6 months of rigorous imprisonment.

6. For the offence punishable under Section 435 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants came to be sentenced to undergo 5 years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.4,000=00 each, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 5 months of rigorous imprisonment.

7. For the offence punishable under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants came to be sentenced to undergo 10 years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000=00 each, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 6 months of rigorous imprisonment.

8. For the offence punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants came to be sentenced to undergo 6 years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000=00 each, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 3 months of rigorous imprisonment.

9. For the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, the appellants came to be sentenced to undergo 6 months imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000=00 each, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further 2 months of imprisonment.

CASE OF THE PROSECUTION :

10. The case of the prosecution may be summarised as under :

11. For an incident which had occurred on 28th February 2002, an FIR was lodged (Exh.64) on 21st March 2002 at the Kalol Police Station, District Panchmahals, by one Ahmed Haji Mohmad (PW1) for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 436, 435, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The FIR reads thus :

“Date: 21/03/2002

Sessions Case No.54/2004

Mark-34/1

Date: 28/09/2004

Sd/- (Illegible)

Additional Sessions Judge

Sessions Case. No.54/2004

Mark-A

Date: 28/09/2004

Sd/- (Illegible)

Additional Sessions Judge

Sessions Case No.54/2004

Exhibit-64

Date: 04/01/2005

Sd/- (Illegible)

Additional Sessions Judge

Kalol Police Station, C.R. No. I-47/2002,

As per Sections-394, 436, 435, 120B of the IPC and Section

135 of the B.P. Act

Date and Time of Occurrence of Offence:

Date: 28/02/2002, 23:00 hours

Date and Time of Declaration of Offence:

Date: 21/03/2002, 21:15 hours

All residing at: Sherpura, Ta. Ghoghamba

My name is Ahemad Haji Mohamad Hathida, Muslim, Aged 33 Years, Occupation: Agriculture & Business, Residing at: Karoli, Taluka: Kalol, Permanent Resident : B/h. Octroi Naka, Gondhara, Taluka: Godhara.

I