BHAVESH MULJI BATHWAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29th March, 2005 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions judge, Fast Track Court No. 7. Jamnagar, in Sessions Case No. 139 of 2002 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 380, 363, 364-A, 387, 376 (2) (f), 377, 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months and to pay fine of Rs. 250/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 days for the offence under Section 448 of IPC; six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days for the offence under Section 380 of IPC; rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 363 of ipc; imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 364-A of IPC; rigorous imprisonment of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 387 of IPC; rigorous imprisonment of ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 15,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 376 (2) (f) of IPC; rigorous imprisonment of five years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 377 of IPC; rigorous imprisonment of life imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 25,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and rigorous imprisonment of one year and to pay fine of rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for the offence under Section 201 of IPC.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the complainant Ramangiri @ Rameshgiri babugiri Goswami had lodged a complaint at the Kalawad Police Station stating that he was residing at Bawana Math, outside nagarwada at Kalawad along with his wife, son and daughter and had a factory by the name of Saurashtra Emery Pvt. Ltd at ranuja Road at Kalawad. On 25th March, 2002, they were sleeping on the second floor of their residence and as it was summer season, they had kept the door of the room open. Early in the morning at about 4. 45 o'clock, there was a thumping noise on the wooden staircase in the room due to which, the complainant woke up and saw that his daughter (hereinafter referred to as 'the victim") was not in the bed. He, therefore, came down the stairs to inquire and found someone carrying his daughter and running away and hence, he went after him. When he came on the road, he met gafarsha Babusha, who told him that a man carrying a girl had gone near Santoshi Mata temple. On going a little further, he met muljibhai Rathod who also told him that a man carrying a girl had gone towards santoshi Mata temple. Thereafter, he looked here and there but could not find anyone carrying his daughter. He, therefore, returned home. Upon returning home, he found that his Samsung mobile phone bearing No. 9825053048 was missing and he also saw a pair of slippers lying under the staircase, which did not belong to any of his family members.

(3.) THE complainant's father was running a school called Vandana Vidyalaya, which had a telephone bearing No. 22239 and had a caller ID. At about 8. 00 a. m. , the complainant received a phone call from his stolen mobile phone on the phone at vandana School and was told that his daughter was in the custody of the caller. Thereafter, two three phone calls were received from the same number. At about 8. 30 a. m. , a phone call was received which was picked up by the complainant's son chintan, who recognized the voice of the caller to be that of Bhavesh, a resident of nani Vavdi. The said Bhavesh used to work in their factory and on and off used to come to their residence in connection with his work. As the said Bhavesh was not working properly, he had been fired about three months ago. Bhavesh told that he was speaking from Rajkot and from the sound of traffic coming from the background, it appeared that he was calling up from somewhere on the highway. Thereafter, bhavesh again called up at 8. 40 a. m. and demanded Rs. 10. 00 lakhs for returning the complainant's daughter and said that he would inform him later as to where the money was to be delivered. This conversation was recorded in the tape recorder. At the relevant time, his daughter was wearing a cream coloured shirt and a midi with brown checks. She was also wearing gold earrings and a nose stud. The complainant suspected that Bhavesh, a resident of Nani Vavdi (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') had entered his open house, stolen his mobile phone, kidnapped his daughter and demanded Rs. 10. 00 lakhs by way of ransom. The aforesaid complaint (Ex. 107) was recorded by Shri J. K. Vank, police Sub-Inspector, Kalavad Police station. Thereafter, the same was noted down in the station diary and was registered as Kalavad Police Station I. C. R. No. 48 of 2002 for the offences punishable under sections 363, 448, 380 and 387 of the indian Penal Code.