Crl.A.659/2008 Page 1 of 7

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment delivered on: July 26, 2011

+

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 659/2008

SHAHZAD KHAN

....APPELLANT

Through: Appellant in custody with Mr.K.Singhal,

Advocate.

Versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

....RESPONDENT

Through: Ms.Fizani Husain, APP.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BHARIHOKE

1. Whether Reporters of local papers

may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3. Whether the judgment should be

reported in Digest ?

AJIT BHARIHOKE, J.(ORAL)

1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated

24^th July, 2008 in Sessions Case No. 109/2007, FIR No. 394/2003,

under Sections 392/397/34 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act, P.S. Malviya

Nagar and consequent order on sentence dated 25^th July, 2008

whereby the appellant Shahzad Khan has been convicted for the

offences punishable under Sections 392 IPC as also Section 25 of the

Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 07 years, besides fine of

2011:DHC:3723

Crl.A.659/2008 Page 2 of 7

` 5000/- for the offence under Section 392 IPC and for the offence

under Section 25 of the Arms Act, he has been sentenced to

undergo RI for the period of one year, besides fine of `1000/-.

2. Briefly stated, background facts for the disposal of this appeal

are that the appellant Shahzad Khan, along with two others was sent

for trial in case FIR No.394/2003 under Sections 392/397/34 IPC and

Section 27 of the Arms Act on the allegations that on the night

intervening 15/16^th May, 2003, at around 11.30 p.m., the appellant

and his co-accused persons hired the TSR of the complainant for

going to Malviya Nagar. On the way, near Andhra School, they

asked to stop the TSR. Thereafter, they robbed the complainant of

`400/- and a polythene packet, which contained his driving licence,

voter card and TSR documents. Thereafter, the appellant and his

co-accused persons pushed him out of the TSR and fled away in the

same TSR. However, Constable Radhey Ram and Constable Ram

Niwas, who were coming from the side of Pushp Vihar on a motor

cycle chased them and apprehended them. It is alleged, on search,

a knife was recovered from the possession of the appellant.

3. The appellant was charged for the offence punishable under

Sections 392/397/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He

pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

2011:DHC:3723

Crl.A.659/2008 Page 3 of 7

4. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant, prosecution

has examined 16 witnesses, including the complainant, as also two

Constables who chased the TSR and apprehended the appellant and

his co-accused persons.

5. The appellant, in his statement, under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

denied the prosecution story and claimed to be innocent.

6.

Learned Additional Sessions Judge, on consideration of the

submissions made by the parties and the evidence on record, found

the appellant guilty of Sections 392 IPC as also Section 25 of the

Arms Act and convicted and sentenced him accordingly.

7. Learned Shri K.Singhal, Advocate appearing for the appellant,

at the outset, on the instructions of the appellant, who is present in

court, submits that the appellant admits his guilt and he does not

wish to challenge his conviction under Section 392 IPC and Section

25 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel, however, has confined his

arguments against the quantum of sentence awarded to the

appellant. Learned counsel submits that the sentence awarded to

the appellant is too harsh