LAWS(GJH)-2012-6-22

SANTOSHBHAI RAMAVTAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On June 19, 2012
SANTOSHBHAI RAMAVTAR YADAV Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Baroda, on 22.7.2005 in Sessions Case No.176 and 254 of 2003. The appellants were tried and convicted for the offences punishable under Section 364 read with 120-B and Section 302 read with Sections 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year for the offence under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code; to undergo RI for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default, to undergo SI for ten days for the offence under Section 364 read with Section 120(B)of the IPC; to undergo RI for 1 year for the offence under Section-148 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, SI for 10 days for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that one Gulbaharkhan @ Gulvar Ahmad Sherkhan Pathan was kidnapped by six appellants at about 1.00 p.m. on 30.4.2003 while he was travelling on his motorcycle near Gayatri Steel Gate at Vadodara. As per the prosecution case, he was forcibly kidnapped into an Indica car by six appellants. The car was then seen entering in Graphite Mill Compound at Vadodara and the dead body was found from a room in a building in the Graphite Mill Compound. The hands and legs of the dead body were tied and throat was cut.

(3.) The charge was framed against the six accused persons at Exhibit-11 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B, 364 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. At the end of the trial, the Trial Court found that the prosecution was successful in establishing the charges and recorded conviction and awarded sentence as stated here-in-above. Hence this appeal.