JUDGMENT :

Shameem Akther, J.

Since the facts of the case and issue involved in all these appeals are identical and since all these appeals arise out of the same judgment, all these appeals are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. For convenience of discussion, the parties are hereinafter referred ton as arrayed before the trial Court.

3. Criminal Appeal Nos. 599, 638, 657, 685 and 735 of 2012 are filed by A1, A5, A6, A2 and A3 respectively and Criminal Appeal No.694 of 2012 is filed by the complainant, challenging the judgment, dated 28.06.2012, passed in S.C.No.477 of 2010 by the learned VIII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Hyderabad. Altogether, there are seven accused in this case. The Court below, vide impugned judgment, dated 28.06.2012, while acquitting A1 to A7 of the offence under Section 120B of IPC and A1, A4 and A7 of the offence under Section 396 of IPC, convicted A2, A3, A5, A6 of the offence under Section 396 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,0