SHAUKAT HUSSEIN HAJIBHAI SHAIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the present appeals arise from the very judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, they are being considered together. The only distinction is that Criminal Appeal No. 73 of 2006 is against the conviction, whereas Criminal Appeal No. 709 of 2006 is against the acquittal granted by the learned Sessions Judge.

(2.) BOTH the appeals arise from the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 61 of 2003 dated 28 -10 -2005, whereby Accused -1 (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 73 of 2006 - hereinafter referred to 'A -l') has been convicted for the offences under Secs. 364A, 387, 365, 120B and Sec. 506(2) of I.P.C. and sentence has been imposed upon A -l; (a) life -imprisonment with the fine of Rs. 10,000/ - for the offence under Sec. 364A; (b) R.I. for 5 (five) years with the fine of Rs. 2,000/ - for the offence under Sec. 387 of I.P.C.; and (c) R.I. for 4 (four) years with the fine of Rs. 2,000/ - for the offence under -Sec. 365 of I.P.C. and life -imprisonment with the fine of Rs. 2,000/ - for the offence under Sec. 120B of I.P.C. No separate punishment has been imposed for the offence under Sec. 506(2) of I.P.C. All punishments are ordered to run concurrently. However, A -l has been acquitted for the offence under Sec. 394 of I.P.C. A -2 is acquitted for the offence charged under Secs. 394, 387, 364A, 365, 506 and 120B. A -3 has been acquitted for the offence under Sec. 212 of I.P.C. As recorded herein above, A -l has preferred appeal against the order of conviction, whereas State has preferred appeal against the order of acquittal, but both from the very judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge from the very Sessions Case No. 61 of 2003.

(3.) AS per the Prosecution Case, the complaint was filed by Mohammad Faruk - P.W. 1, stating that some unknown calls were being received at the shop, where the complainant and his father are doing business. On 25 -1 -2000 his father left the shop earlier and when the complainant reached at his residence, he was told by his mother that his father had already gone out, saying that he might come late. At 2 -30 a.m., a phone call was received at the residence and when it was picked up, the inquiry was made about Farukbhai, and the phone was disconnected. At that time, the complainant found that his father had not come back. Again such type of calls were received about five times and the phone calls were disconnected from other end. At about 3 -00 a.m., again one phone call was received and the said call was picked up by the wife of the complainant and she was conveyed that within short time they would arrange for the talk between Faruk -complainant and his father Babubhai. Therefore, the complainant doubted about the whereabout of his father, whether something had happened or not and, therefore, he picked up the phone when it was received next time and when he started talking he found that his father was speaking on the other end but the phone was disconnected. Since the voice of his father was identified by the complainant he realised that somebody might have kidnapped his father and, therefore, he called the other relatives. The other phone -calls were also received. Thereafter, at 4 -00 a.m., one person talked on the phone and told the complainant that the complainant might talk to Babubhai and when the complainant talked with his father, he (father) said that he was kidnapped and those persons are demanding Rs. 10 lac. Therefore, the complainant should make arrangement for the amount by 1 -00 O'clock noon and he was also told that again phone call would be made and complainant would be informed about the place at which the amount was to be given at about 2 -00 O'clock and the complainant was asked to bring the amount somehow or the other and if the amount was not given, the kidnappers would kill the victim. The complainant thereafter approached the Police Officer, who asked for keeping watch over the phone and the CHller I.D. facility was also arranged. Next day at about 1 -15 p.m., again phone call was received, enquiring as to whether Rs. 10 lac was ready, to which the complainant replied 'yes' and said that he should be permitted to talk with his father, and thereafter, his father talked with the complainant on phone and the complainant informed him that the arrangement of Rs. 5 lac was made, but the other money was yet to be arranged and, therefore, more time may be demanded and the complainant conveyed that the arrangement of money shall be made by about quarter to 3 -00 O'clock. Thereafter, the father of the complainant conveyed to the complainant that they (kidnappers) had agreed and they would make phone call after two hours. The complainant prepared a bag as per the arrangement made by the Police Officer and waited for the second call and the phone call was received at 3 -00 O'clock and the inquiry was made by unknown person as to whether the money was ready and the complainant said 'yes', then the complainant was informed to reach within 20 - 30 minutes Near Ankur School, Paldi Bus Stand, with the money and his person would say 'Babubhai', and thereafter, within 20 minutes his father would reach his residence. Accordingly, the complainant in rickshaw reached the spot and the police officers and other staff were in maruti, watching the complainant and his movement. At that time one person came in Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. GJ -01 -JJ -1052 and he said 'Babubhai' to the complainant and the complainant was about to undertake the exercise of handing over of the bag. At that time all the Police Officers and other persons caught hold of the said person and when they inquired about the father of the complainant, the said person agreed to show the place. All went to one house at Anwar Park Society of Juhapura area and he said that Babubhai was inside. Since the premises was locked, the lock was broken open and when they entered the premise, Babubhai was inside, tied with the rope and then he was released. The person, who led the police to the victim, was Arun Ramji Gajjar, who, upon further inquiry made by the complainant with his father, said that the main leader of the kidnapping is Shaukat Hajibhai Shaikh, appellant herein and his father told him that he was kidnapped from Banas Flat, Opp. S.L.U. College, Near Pritamnagar, Paldi, Ahmedabad.