The lack of evidence for the snatching of items and credibility issues with the recovery memos influenced the court's decision to acquit the appellants.

JUDGMENT :

SURESHWAR THAKUR , J.

1. Since both the appeals (supra) arise from a common verdict, made by the learned trial Judge concerned, hence both are amenable for a common verdict being made thereons.

2. Both the appeals (supra) are directed against a common verdict of conviction, made on 12.8.2021, against the convicts-appellants, upon Sessions case No. 199 of 22.4.2019, thus by the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar. Through the above said verdict, the learned trial Judge concerned, convicted the accused, for the commission of offence punishable, under Section 379-B read with Section 34 of the IPC. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the convicts to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six years, for an offence punishable under Section 379-B read with Section 34 of the IPC, besides also imposed, upon the convicts sentence of fine, comprised in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each, and, in default of payment of fine amount, she sentenced the convicts to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. However, both the convicts were acquitted of the charge framed against them qua commission of an offence punishable under Section 411 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The periods of detention undergone by the convicts, during the investigations, and, trial of the case, were, in terms of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., rather ordered to be set off, from the above imposed sentence(s) of imprisonment.

4. The accused-convicts become aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, become aggrieved from the consequent therewith sentences of imprisonment, and, of fine as became imposed, upon them, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and, hence have chosen to institute thereagainst the instant criminal appeals, before this Court.

Factual Background

5. The genesis of the prosecution case, becomes embodied in the appeal FIR, to which Ex. P-7 is assigned. The narrations carried in Ex. P-7, are that on 28.06.2016 SI Satinder Pal Singh, Incharge Police Post Khasa alongwith other officials of police party, was present in the area of Hamidpura colony near India Gate, in connection with patrolling and search of bad elements, where complainant Akshay Kumar son of Prem Chand, resident of Bharoli Khurd, Police Station Sujanpur, district Pathankot, appeared, and, got recorded his statement before SI Satinder Pal Singh to the effect that he is the resident of the above mentioned address, and, is working in SKS Micro Finance Company having office at Naraingarh, Amritsar. On that day, after making collection on behalf of company, he was going from Jhabal Kalan to Chheharta, Amritsar, on his motorcycle. On the way at about 12.15 p.m. in the area of turning of village Basrake Bhaini, three young persons came on a motorcycle, and, brought their motor cycle parallel to his motorcycle. One of the riders of the aforesaid motorcycle, forcibly snatched his bag containing cash of Rs.60,000/-, one Tab Samsung and two new mobile phones of Nokia, and then they fled towards Chheharta side. Out of the three snatchers, two were clean shaven, and, one was wearing a turban (patka), and all of them were wearing capris. On the above allegations, FIR under sections 379-B/411/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.

Investigation proceedings

6. During investigation, site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared, and, statements of witnesses were recorded. On 15.07.2016 accused Baljit Singh made disclosure statement in case FIR No. 87 dated 16.06.2016 registered at Police Station Gharinda, that on 28.06.2016 he alongwith his companions Satnam Singh and Pritpal Singh committed snatching in the area of Sun Sahib road, Chheharta, Amritsar. Accordingly, accused Baljit Singh was arrested in this case on 16.07.2016 and then on 17.07.2016 in pursuance to his disclosure statement he got recovered six currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/-each. Accused Pritpal Singh was a