VIJAY MAGANLAL PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of these appeals the original accused No. 1, 2, 5 & 7 as well as the State have challenged the judgement and order dated 30.12.1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 18, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 97 of 1990 whereby the trial court has convicted and sentenced the accused as under. Criminal Appeals No. 41, 106 & 116 of 1992 have been preferred by original accused Nos. 1, 2, 5 & 7 against the conviction whereas Criminal Appeal No. 371 of 1992 has been preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence imposed and Criminal Appeal No. 372 of 1992 has been preferred by the State against the acquittal of original accused Nos. 3,4, 8 & 9 recorded under Ss. 364, 365, 363 and 342 r/w 34 of IPC.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that the accused had made a plan and thereby abducted Kiran - son of complainant Ravjibhai and demanded ransom of Rs. 3 lakhs from the complainant. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused also tried to kill Kiran but somehow the plan was foiled. The accused were apprehended and after investigation charge sheet was submitted. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The trial was initiated against the accused and during the course of trial the prosecution examined various witnesses whose evidences were read before us by learned advocates for both the sides. The prosecution also exhibited certain documents which have been perused by us during the course of hearing. At the end of the trial and after recording the statement of the accused under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant as mentioned aforesaid. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgement and order passed by the Sessions Court the accused and the State have preferred the present appeals.

(3.) Mr. R.J. Goswami, learned advocate appearing for the accused has stated that considering the fact that considerable period of time has lapsed, this Court may take a considerate view in the matter. He submitted that the accused are remorseful and is ready and willing to pay appropriate amount as compensation to the victim and his family members which is acceptable to the complainant.