This criminal appeal is filed feeling aggrieved by the

judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

26.06.2018 in S.C.No.53/2015 on the file of the I

Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.

- 3 -

2.

Brief facts of the case are that:-

On 26.07.2014, the accused No.1 being the driver of

Car bearing registration No.KA-28/N-6302 was hired by

the complainant for the purpose of collecting the money

from the retail merchants those who borrowed the

materials from him. It is stated in the complaint that the

complainant collected almost Rs.12,00,000/- from various

customers/merchants. After collecting the amount, they

stopped the vehicle to have dinner in a Dhaba. After

having the dinner, both the accused no.1 and the

complainant were proceeding towards Vijayapur. It is

noticed by the complainant that the said vehicle was being

driven slowly in order to facilitate to commit offence. In

spite of repeated instructions being given to the accused

No.1, he did not bother to drive the car fastly. In the

meantime, when the vehicle reached Chikka-Sindagi on

NH-218 within the jurisdiction of Sindagi Police Station,

the accused Nos.2 to 5 came in another Car bearing

No.KA-28/N-6088 and stopped the vehicle. Accused No.1

- 4 -

stopped his vehicle on the left side of the road. Accused

Nos.2 to 5 got down from the vehicle and assaulted the

complainant, snatched money bag and fled away. A

complaint came to be lodged suspecting the involvement

of the accused No.1 by the complainant. The police have

conducted investigation and on the basis of voluntary

statement of the accused No.1, the police have arrested

other accused persons and amount has been recovered at

the instance of the accused Nos.2 and 3 and submitted the

charge sheet.

3.

To prove the case of the prosecution, the

prosecution examined 14 witnesses i.e., P.W.1 to P.W.14

and got marked Exs.P.1 to 18 and also identified M.O.1 to

9.

4.

The Trial Court after appreciating the oral and

documentary evidence on record, opined that the accused

Nos.1 and 4 have not involved in this case and convicted

the accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 for the offence punishable

under Section 395 of Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved

- 5 -

by the same, the accused Nos.2, 3 and 5/appellants are

before this Court seeking to set aside the impugned

judgment.

5.

Heard the learned counsel, Sri Shantanu Kumar

appearing on behalf of learned counsel, Sri Nandkishore

Boob for the appellants and the learned High Court

Government Pleader, Sri Gururaj V. Hasilkar for the

respondent/State.

6.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for

the appellants that, the impugned judgment of conviction

and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court is against

to the evidence on record and the same is liable to be set

aside. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery has

not been proved through the independent witnesses to

whom the prosecution has cited. It is further submitted

that the alleged incident had taken place during the odd

hours i.e., night hours. The identification parade of the

said accused persons has not been done. In the absence of

identification parade, on the basis of the statement of the

- 6 -

co-accused, it cannot be implicated the appellants in this

case. It is further submitted that, P.W.1, who is the

complainant has turned hostile and not supported the

prosecution case. In spite of these lacuna, the Trial Court

convicted the accused without any evidence and contrary

to the facts. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

7.

Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader justifying the judgment of conviction submits that,

the accused No.1 was the driver of the complainant as on

the date of the alleged incident. In the complaint, the

complainant has suspected the involvement of the accused

No.1. On the strength of suspicious, the accused No.1 was

arrested and on his voluntary statement, the other

accused

persons

were

apprehended.

On

being

apprehended, the recovery has been m