Point of Law : Criminal Law - Theft and robbery - Conviction confirmed - Confessional statement made before trial court - Reliability of - Confessional statement of accused- appellant cannot be treated as partial and applicable to some of offences only.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the respondent.

2. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Vinod Mali, who was convicted and sentenced in S.T. No.503 of 2019 (State Vs. Vinod Mali), arising out of Case Crime No.137 of 2016, registered under Sections 177, 171, 419, 417, 411 and 413 I.P.C. at Police Station G.R.P., District Gorakhpur, in which the accused-appellant was convicted for six months under Section 177 I.P.C., for three months under Section 171 I.P.C., for two years under Section 419 I.P.C., for one year under Section 417 I.P.C., for two years under Section 411 I.P.C. and for six years under Section 413 I.P.C. alongwith fine in all above offences and imprisonment for default of fine.

3. The relevant facts of the case are that on 12.03.2016 police party of Police Station G.R.P., District Gorakhpur was checking at the railway station and platform, when they were present at platform no.2, the informer informed the police party that some persons were standing near the gate no.1; they were suspected and were talking about theft and robbery. Police party went to that place and found that two persons were sitting on different motorcycles and others were standing there; one person was sitting on motorcycle no. U.P. 53 AS 7764 in police uniform; when he was inquired he told his name as Vinod Mali S/o Late Phooldev Mali, R/o Loharpurwa, P.S. Kaimpiarganj, permanent resident of village Pandit Purwa, P.S. Dohari Ghat, District Mau and he told that he was a constable and posted in Kotwali Maharajganj. He was asked to produce identity card, which was produced by him; prima facie identity card was looking suspicious, hence, accused Vinod Mali was asked to tell the name of S.P., Maharajganj but he could not tell name of S.P., Maharajganj and after that he was asked to tell the name of Inspector Kotwali, Maharajganj but he also could not tell the name of Inspector, Kotwali Maharajganj; when he was strictly inquired, he told that he was not a constable but rather he has running a gang of which he was a leader and other persons are his gang members. They used to make theft or robbery of passengers travelling in train and by that, they earn the bread and butter of their family. Vinod Mali also told the police that if some member of his gang is caught by the people, he helps them in the name of being in the police department. All the persons standing there, were arrested by the police and they confessed that they were having Alprazolam powder, stolen motorcycles and stolen mobile phones etc.

4. From the possession of accused-appellant 120 grams of Alprazolam powder, two stolen mobile phones, one stolen motorcycle were recovered and a fake identity card of U.P. Police was also recovered at the time of arrest. The police uniform of appellant-Vinod Mali was also found fake.

5. Alongwith appellant-accused, other co-accused persons Santosh, Chauhan, Nand Lal @ Nandu Chauhan, Ram Darash Nishad and Ram Kishore @ Raj Kishore were also arrested and from their possession also Alprazolam powder, stolen mobile phones, stolen tablets and stolen motorcycle were recovered. As per the recovery memo, all the above persons were booked under Section 8/21/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and also under Sections 411, 413, 414, 417, 419 and 171 I.P.C. All the recovered articles were sealed on the spot and sample seal was prepared. Recovery memo was also prepared on the spot and the cases were registered against above accused persons.

6. The learned trial court has commenced the trial of above accused persons after framing different charges against them and after examination of P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, the case file of appellant-Vinod Mali was separated from other co-accused persons.

7. The learned trial court framed charges under Sections 177, 171, 419, 417, 411 and 413 I.P.C. against the accused-appellant and he was convicted for all the above offences. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and