STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SHAILENDRA RAJDEV PASVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 (1) (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in view of judgment and order of acquittal dated 17.1.2006 passed by learned Presiding Officer, 7th Fast Track Court, Surat, in Sessions Case No.133 of 2001, whereby respondents came to be acquitted of offences under Sections 363, 364, 364 (A), 365 and 302 read with Section 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 21 (1) (A) of the Arms Act and under Sections 3 and 5 of the Indian Explosive Act, as the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

(2.) Criminal Revision Application No.50 of 2006 is preferred by the applicant/original complainant challenging the very judgment.

(3.) Mr.Rutvij Oza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant-State of Gujarat has taken us to genesis of the prosecution case in the complaint lodged by one Paramhans Mangal Yadav residing at Bhaktinagar Society, Surat, who was working as a Supervisor in a private textile having two sons and two daughters and the youngest son, Arjun, who was studying in standard-2 was found missing. Though complaint was registered on 14.2.2001, the incident about missing of son, Arjun, was disclosed before Police on 5.2.2001 and entry was made with Kapodara Police Station. According to complainant, on 4.2.2001 he left for his job around 8 a.m. and when returned home for taking meal, his son was not seen and he inquired whereabouts of his son with relatives and friends but till 5.2.2001, son of the complainant was not traceable. In efforts to trace out his son, opponent-accused No. 1, Shailendra, also initially helped him but in view of suspicious conduct of accused No. 1 and on further inquiry it was found that accused No. 1 had kidnapped son of the complainant. After accompanying the complainant initially in his efforts to find out his son, accused No. 1 suddenly disappeared and after four days the complainant received a telephone call from accused No. 1 that he was at Vapi and upon further inquiry accused No. 1 disclosed that he was not happy since Arjun, son of the complainant, was missing. Therefore, the complainant asked his brother-in-law Sadhusharan and other relatives to bring Shailendra back from Vapi and after taking Shailendra into confidence at Surat, it was disclosed that complainant had some animosity with accused No. 5 and at his behest Shailendra, A-1, had kidnapped Arjun, son of the complainant. The investigation was carried out. The dead body of son of the complainant was found, was sent for postmortem and charge was framed at Exh.5 for the offences under Sections 363, 364, 364 (A), 365 and 302 read with Section 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 21 (1) (A) of the Arms Act and under Sections 3 and 5 of the Indian Explosive Act and the accused were tried, which resulted into acquittal of the respondents-accused.