RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, Rakesh Kumar (A -1), Joginder Singh (A -2) and K.Deep Singh (A -3) question the correctness and legality of a judgment dated

(2.) 03.2012 of Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 07/11 arising out of FIR No. 251/10 PS Kashmere Gate by which they were convicted under Sections 365/392/307/34 IPC. A -1 and A -2 were further convicted under Section 397 IPC. By an order dated 12.03.2012, they were awarded various prison terms with fine. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the chargesheet, was that on 20.12.2010 at around 06.30 P.M. in front of Star Banquet Hall, near Metro Gate No.1, the appellants in furtherance of common intention kidnapped Sanjay Kumar at knife point and took him to Bawana canal. After inflicting injuries by a knife and depriving him of Accent car bearing No.DL 8SW 0011, cash Rs.2,200/ - and two mobile phones, they threw him in the canal in an attempt to murder him. The police machinery was set in motion when the incident was reported and Daily Diary (DD) No. 26A (Ex.PW -2/A) was recorded at 20.54 hours at PS Kashmere Gate. The victim was taken to Sonipat Hospital where he was medically examined vide MLC (Ex.PW -6/A). The First Information Report was lodged on 26.12.2010 after recording complainant Sanjay Kumar s statement (Ex.PW -1/A). On 10.01.2011, the appellants were arrested at around 07.30 P.M; an air pistol from the left -side dub of A -2; a mobile phone make Nokia -1209 from A -3 were recovered. Pursuant to A - 1 s disclosure statement, CNG kit fitted in the robbed car was recovered from his residence. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was submitted against the appellants; they were duly charged and brought to trial. The prosecution examined nine witnesses to substantiate the charges. In 313 statements, the appellants denied their complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication without examining any witness in defence. The trial resulted in their conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, they have preferred the appeals.

(3.) ON 26.12.2010, the victim Sanjay Kumar recorded statement (Ex.PW -1/A) and gave detailed account as to how and under what circumstances, he was abducted by the assailants while they were armed with pistol/knife and inflicted injuries to him in the car. He further disclosed that attempt was made by the assailants to throw him in the river / canal after robbing him of his car, mobile phones and cash Rs.2,200/ -. While appearing as PW -1, the complainant identified the appellants as assailants who had abducted him on 20.12.2010 at 06.30 P.M. when he was waiting outside Star Banquet Hall, Metro Station, Kashmere Gate while sitting in the car No. DL 8SW 0011, Accent, black colour belonging to his employer Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate. He further deposed that in the meanwhile, an individual came and knocked the window pane. When he opened the window pane assuming that the individual must be asking for the way / direction, the said man put revolver on his head and assaulted him on his left hand by a knife. He was pushed inside the car and his associates caught hold of him from behind. He identified A -1 to be the assailant who had put revolver on his head; A -2 and A -3 had caught hold of him in the car. He further testified that A -2 and A -3 took out his mobile phones and purse which contained Rs.2,200/ -. He was assaulted and injured by a knife on his hands and feet on the rear seat. After abducting him, the appellants stopped the car at Bawana road towards Sonipat near a river; pulled him out of the car and threw him in the river having deep water. When the assailants left the spot, he came out; stopped a motorcyclist; requested him to call his employer Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate and reported the incident to him. He identified the mobile phone robbed by the assailants. In the cross -examination, the witness was confronted with the statement (Ex.PW -1/A) on certain facts which were omitted therein. He disclosed that he was working with Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the last ten years. He was thrown in the river at around 09.00 or 09.30 P.M. There was no light near the river and it was complete dark. The motorcyclist to whom he requested to assist came from Sonipat side. He was unable to disclose the number of the motorcycle. He denied the suggestion that he had sold the car (Ex.P2) without permission of his employer.