MOHAMMAD SALIM ALIAS PAPPU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I propose to deal with two criminal appeals bearing No. 663 of 2000 Mohd. Salim @ Pappu and CRLA 702 of 2000 Mohd. Mustaqeen @ Raju, both arising out of judgment of conviction dated 2.8.2000 and the order of sentence dated 11.8.2000 whereby both appellants were held guilty under Sections 364/34, IPC and 397/34, IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for even years and fine of Rs. one thousand each in default SI for a month.

(2.) Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on 18.7.1997, the appellants engaged taxi (Armada) DL 3C G-7334 for going to Aligarh to fetch their parents. Hire charges were settled @ Rs. 1,000/- and it was agreed that they will come back to Delhi the same day evening. Accordingly, the complainant along with the appellant left Delhi at about 10.30 a.m. in the said Armada No. DL 3C G-7334 and when they reached Aligarh, the appellants asked him to go a little further. When the jeep reached near Kirawali on theroad leading Mainpuri, appellant Mustaqueem forcibly caught hold of the steering of the vehicle and made the complainant to sit between the two appellants. The jeep waabrought to the halt at some distance and thereafter both appellants squeezed the complainant in between them and tried to strangulate him with the seat belt and also assaulted him with kicks and fists. Complainant, however, managed to jump out by breaking the rear window panes. The appellants escaped in complainant's jeep. Complainant then went to the local police station i.e. P.S. Bichawa. District Mainpuri and lodged a complaint in this regard. On this a case FIRNo. 0/97, under Sections 364/394/420/34 was registered at P.S. Bichawa, District Mainpuri and was investigated by SI Nanak Chand. Complainant Ram Niwas was got medically examined and he was found to have suffered some injuries (1) lacerated wound muscle deep on the right elbow (joint); (2) abrasion on posterial aspect of right hand laterally; (3) contusion on the front of right knee joint swelling present; and (4) abrasion on the right side neck. These injuries were opined to be simple caused by blunt object. SI Nank Chand then went in search of the vehicle viz., Armada Jeep No. DL 3C G-7334 which was found near village Karim Ganj. Kirawali, Mainpuri. Two appellants were also found therein. Appellants were taken into custody and from their search some countrymade pistols were allegedly recovered about which separate cases were registered. Owner of the vehicle was informed telephonically. Thereafter on 26.7.97, the case was got registered at Delhi, P.S. Badarpur vide FIR No. 500/97 as the incident of abduction had taken place at Delhi. Various documents namely FIR lodged in Bichawa, MLC, seizure memo, etc., were also made available to the Police, P.S. Badarpur on 26.7.97 and thereafter SI Dharama PalKalra of P.S. Badarpur recorded the statement of the complainant, inspected the spot, prepared a site plan, brought appellants to Delhi on production warrant and also seized the vehicle involved which was returned to the rightful owner. After completing the investigation, challan was submitted against the appellants under Sections 364/420/394/307/34, IPC. On committal of case to the Court of Sessions, charges under Section 364/34, IPC-were framed against appellants. They were also charged separately under Section 397, IPC to which they plead not guilty. In proof of its case prosecution examined Kushal Kumar, PW1; Ram Niwas, PW 2; Dr. V.B. Sarashurt, PW 3; Con. Rajbir Singh, PW 4; Con. Ram Rattan, PW 5; Con. Kamal, PW 6; H.C. Suman Lata, PW 7; HC Bhagirath Prasad, PW 8; Con Zile Singh, PW 9; and Nanak Chand SI, PW 10; and Dharam Pal Kalra, PW 11.

(3.) After considering the material on record and the submission made by the learned Counsel for the appellnts and learned APP, learned Additional Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that charges under Sections 364/34 and 397, IPC stand proved against the appellants. Accordingly, he convicted the appellants under Sections 364/397, IPC and sentenced them to RI for seven years + fine. No separate sentence was awarded under Section 364, IPC in view of the porvisions of Section 71 of IPC. Feeling aggrieved the appellants have preferred this appeal.