( 1. ) THIS Judgment governs the disposal of Criminal Revision No. 392/ 2003, Komal v. State of M. P. and Cr. Revision No. 393/2003; Shrilal v. State of M. P. , as the same arise out of the same judgment.

( 2. ) THE aforesaid criminal revisions have been filed by the applicants against the judgment dated 21-4-2003 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh arising out of judgment dated 22-4-2002 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narsinghgarh thereby convicting the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 394, IPC and sentencing each of them RI for 3 years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, they shall undergo R. I. for 2 months.

( 3. ) ON appeal, learned Appellate Court maintained the conviction and sentence as passed by the Trail Court.

( 4. ) THE prosecution case in nutshell, before the Trial Court was that on 23-10-2000 while Satyanarayan, Rajni, Prakash Sahu, Anita Sahu and Arvind Sahu were travelling in their motor car, on the way, near Village Teejbadli, tyre of their motor car was punctured and they were changing the same, at that juncture, four persons came over there, assaulted them by lathi and committed robbery. While committing robbery they used country made pistol and looted cash amount, silver and golden ornaments, one blue coloured purse and one brown lady bag. The property was worth Rs. 75,000/ -. The FIR was lodged by Arvind Sahu in the police station to this effect against unknown persons. During investigation, accused Shrilal was taken into custody on 2-12-2000. On being inquired he got recovered 5000/- rupees cash, one silver payal and one bag and one purse. The Test Identification Parade of accused Shrilal was held. Accused was put for identification in test identification parade in jail vide Ex. P-4 and identified by prosecution witnesses Prakash (P. W. 4) and Anita Sahu (P. W. 6 ). The property was also identified in its test identification parade. After usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed before learned Magistrate for the offence under Section 394, IPC. Learned Magistrate (Mr. Kapil Mehta), Narsinghgarh, District Rajgarh framed charge only under Section 394, IPC. According to the applicants, they were falsely implicated in the case. In defence, Mahendra Singh (D. W. 1) was examined. Learned Trial Court, after examining the prosecution witnesses and on hearing both the parties, convicted the applicants as mentioned above.

( 5. ) AGAINST concurrent findings of facts arrived at by both the Courts below, ordinarily, this Court is slow in re- appreciating the evidence but against some glaring legal defect this Court is constrained to interfere in these revisions. It is admitted position that applicant Shrilal was arrested vide arrest memo dated 2-12-2000 at 5. 00 p. m. vide Ex. P-3 and he alone was put for identification in test identification parade. Memo is Ex. P-4. He was duly identified by witnesses Prakash (P. W. 4) and Anita (P. W. 6 ). On the memorandum statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act vide Ex. P-1 looted property, i. e. , cash Rs. 5000/-, one silver payal, one blue coloured purse and one brown lady bag were seized. The property was also identified in Test Identification Parade by Anita (P. W. 6 ). She has also identified the property in Court. Accused Shrilal is also identified by both the witnesses in Court but for other 3 applicants named Santosh, Manoj and Komal, their names are not mentioned in the FIR. They have also not been named in 161, Cr. PC statement by the witnesses. Even then they were not put for identification in test identification parade. No property has been seized from their possession. No evidence has been led in Court by the prosecution as to on what basis they were arrested and put for trial.

( 6. ) LEARNED Trial Court has convicted these three applicants on the basis of dock identification by Prakash (P. W. 4) and Anita Sahu (P. W. 6 ). Arrest memo of all these three accused/applicants have not bee