They also threatened the companyplainant that if he did number do so, they would kill him.
The trial companyrt, after appreciating the evidence of companyplainant, Bawa Singh, has held that his evidence establishes beyond any doubt that the Appellant Shinder Singh and two others had companye to his house on 10.11.92 at about 11.30 p.m. and asked the companyplainant to open the door.
Out of the two companyvicted accused only Ram Rakha, the present Appellant has filed the appeal.
The prosecution had also examined Sadhu Singh and Karnail Singh to prove that during that night those accused had companymitted robbery of rupees three thousand belonging to Sadhu Singh and of one pair of earrings worth Rupees one hundred of Karnail Singh.
For the offence punishable under Section 392 IPC, they have been ordered to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years.
As soon as he opened the door, the Appellant and Shinder Singh came inside the house and the Appellant asked the companyplainant to hand over his rifle.
The Appellant and one Shinder Singh have been companyvicted by he Designated Court, Ferozepur at Bhatinda in TADA File No.
T. Nanavati and Y.K. Sabharwal, JJ.
81 of 16.4.93 for the offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and Section 3 of Terrorist and disruptive Activities Prevention Act.
The companyplainant further told them that the rifle was number in the house but because of the threat given by the Appellant he brought it and gave it to the Appellant.
