LAWS(DLH)-2014-10-30

MOHD MAJID Vs. STATE

Decided On October 16, 2014
Mohd Majid Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MOHD .Majid and Raj Kumar are convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 364A/34 IPC for the kidnapping of Deepak Singhal and directed to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ - each and in default of payment for fine to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months. Besides the appellants two more accused were involved i.e. Sagar and Yusuf who were declared proclaimed offenders and are thus not before this Court.

(2.) LEARNED counsels for the appellants assail the impugned judgment on the ground that the appellants have been falsely implicated as Raj Kumar was the contractor in the factory of Deepak and Suresh Singhal and to avoid making payment that was due this false case was foisted on them. The versions of Deepak Singhal, his father Suresh Singhal and cousin Ashish Singhal are contradictory to each other and not corroborated by the telephonic call records exhibited by the prosecution. Even accepting the prosecution case at best offence of extortion would be made out and not one of kidnapping for ransom. The alleged seizure of money is all planted and the defence evidence in this regard has been ignored. Despite the car number having come to the knowledge of the police officers immediately after the incident however, no steps were taken to trace the same. No wireless message was flashed and in a very unusual manner the said car was found parked in the nearby area. The arrest and the alleged recovery at the instance of the appellants are highly doubtful. Even as per the prosecution witnesses, Raj Kumar was arrested on March 02, 2014 in early morning along with his brother and his arrest has been wrongly shown to be on March 04, 2012 thus discrediting the recovery made at his instance. No public witness was joined at the time of alleged recovery. Majid was allegedly arrested near the metro station however, the time of his arrest is shrouded with mystery. Some of the witnesses have stated that he was arrested at 10.30 PM and others have stated that he was arrested at 10.20 AM. Further no public witness was associated despite the availability of the metro staff and public witnesses. The key witnesses, that is Pankaj Mishra and Subodh, the Foreman and Security Guard have not been produced as witnesses. No finger prints were lifted from the car, nor the car was got mechanically examined.

(3.) MOHD .Majid led no defence evidence and his plea in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C is that he was working in the factory of the complainant as labourer for about four months under Raj Kumar Contractor along with 11 labourers. Since there was conflict about the payment with the factory owner Deepak Singhal and his father for not making full payments in time an amount of Rs.50 -60 thousand was due towards the owner of the factory and thus he made a complaint to PS Bindapur but he was asked to intimate the Beat Official. He was lifted from his house and no recovery was made at his instance. Similar plea has been taken by Raj Kumar who has also led defence evidence. The three defence witnesses i.e. Smt.Chand Tara, Rajender, the mother and brother of Raj Kumar and Subhash his neighbour respectively have deposed about the apprehension of Raj Kumar and his brother Rajender on the morning of March 02, 2012.