THE STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. GAUTAMKUMAR DEVJIBHAI RATHOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The state has filed an appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure feeling aggrieved by the order of acquittal dated 31.01.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Bharuch in Sessions Case No.99 of 2002 whereby the respondent accused came to be acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 364(a),365, 368, 341, 342, 343, 346, 397, 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections Section 25(1) (b), 25(2) (1-A), 25(2) (1-AA) and under Section 29 of the Arms Act.

(2.) The background on which the present appeal is filed is that on 15.07.1997 as per the case of the prosecution, original accused nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in conspiracy to each other has illegally abducted the son of the complainant named - Manish with a view to get some undue advantage and for ransom and to give ultimate outcome, committed the offence by abducting the son of the complainant. A complaint came to be lodged by one Bhupendra Prabhulal Shah before the Ankleshwar Police Station on the premise and by alleging that the complainant a resident of Kusumharwadi, opposite to Navi Nagri, Ankleshwar is having business of 'Shroff and Computer Shop' (as a financier). The complainant is having one son named Manish aged about 28 years and one daughter named Krina, who has already got married in the year 1988 and residing at Mumbai, whereas his son Manish got married in the year 1995 at Nadiad with a daughter of Bipinchandra Pranlal Shah named as Binta and out of the wedlock there is one daughter named Hetvi aged about one year. With all these family members, the complainant is residing at Ankleshwar and running a business of financier in the name of M.P. Shroff at Chauta Bazar and in the name of Shroff Information and Technology Private Limited. Business of selling computer and programming is also being undertaken, which practically is run by son Manish along with one Jigar Shah, Minesh Jani, Ilyaisbhai, Shhabirbhai Rangwala of Bharuch. The routine of his son Manish was that in the morning he is going and attending his shop, at around 2:30 after taking lunch, he is again going back to the shop and after 7:00 pm returning home after closing the shop. Lastly, on 16.07.1999. when son Manish of the complainant went to drop one Bhavin Dave after 7:00 pm after closing of his shop in a Maruti Car bearing registration no. GJ-1-16-C-9992, Manish did not returned to home and about 8:20 pm at night, a phone call came, which was attended by wife of the complainant, in which Manish has stated that he has to take the dinner at hotel. Again around 10:10 pm in the night, a phone call was made by Manish which was attended by the complainant. in which, Manish has conveyed that he has been abducted and someone took the phone from the hands of the Manish and conveyed that they have taken Manish and will talk again after about one hour. Later on after about half an hour, around 10:30 pm, some phone call came to be received, in which there was a demand of Rs. 1 'Khoka" ie. Rs.1 Crores. It was deliberated, that there is no capacity to pay. Therefore, they reduced the amount to Rs.50 lakhs. Even that was also not there and, therefore, it was conveyed that no less amount will be tolerated and they will again call in the next day morning. It is further the case of the complainant in his complaint that on the next day i.e. 16.07.1997 at about 9:00 am in the morning a phone call was received, inquiring about the money. Resultantly, it was conveyed by the complainant that Rs.5 - 7 lakhs can be managed and there is 'Gujarat Bandh' on account of which the banks are also closed and therefore, conveyed that beyond Rs.10/- lakhs (10 petis), nothing is possible to be managed and, therefore, by abusive language a threat was administered that less than Rs.50 lakhs will not be acceptable and in that case, Manish i.e. the son of the complainant will be done away. Again at around 10:00 o'clock, a further phone call came to be received, in which the said threat was reiterated and demanded Rs.50/- lakhs. Again a phone call was repeated and then conveyed that on the next day, at around 12:00 o'clock, they will talk again and thereafter, when the phone was given to Manish, Manish has conveyed that anything troublesome can taken place with him and then after some deliberations, the phone was put-up Thereafter on 17.01.1997 at around 1:00 o'clock in the noon, it was conveyed that whether the amount is ready or not and the same was conveyed to the complainant in gujarati language wherein it was informed that the amount is ready and then the Manish had a talk with his mother as well. Again at 2:00 pm the phone call to be received in which it was conveyed that come to Narol chowkdi and go to the right side of the Himmatnagar and after going to Indira Bridge, near Koba Patia, a person will raise his hand and handover the bag consisting of money. Thereafter, an assertion has taken place further in which, when they reached at Koba circle at around quarter to ten pm, no person was standing and despite the fact that upto 12:30 pm in the night, the complainant and other person waited, but nobody turned and then came back. On 18.07.1997 at around 9:00 o'clock in the morning again a phone call came and again deliberation took place and called at a place and at that time, three persons came out from one Blue colour Cielo Car or Thousand and one person who was driving the car dragged out the driver of the Maruti car and then two other persons entered and gouge the person's mouth, who was driving Maruti Car and thereafter both the cars in a speed went ahead over the bridge. It is further asserted that one person driving a moped belonging to Bharwad community has seen this incident and these circumstance are brought to the notice of son and daughter of one Aayubbhai. When the daughter of Aayubbhai was shown the photographs of some of the persons who were arraigned in such previous offence, out of which one Kamlesh Barot, Gautam Ramanuj were identified, Since this was the circumstance happened with the complainant and the accused persons have taken away and abducted son for ransom and huge amount of Rs.50/- lakhs and detained illegally, took him to various places, and thereby have committed serious offence, as a result of which a complaint came to be lodged before the Ankleshwar Police Station.

(3.) The Investigating Officer on receipt of the complaint has registered a complaint under Sections 364(a), 365, 341, 342, 343, 346, 397, 120B, 34, 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1), 25(1-A) and 25 (1-AA) along with Sections 25(2), 25(3), 29 and 35 of the Arms Act. On finding prima facie material upon conducting the investigation at length, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Ankleshwar as against as many as 11 accused persons. For the aforesaid main accused, later on additional charge sheet has also been submitted. Some of the accused persons were arrested and some were about to be arrested, but then since there was no jurisdiction to try the case with the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ankleshwar, upon verifying the papers in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case was committed to the Sessions Court for onwards trial and then the same was registered as Sessions Case No. 99 of 2002.