FIROZ KALUBHAI ALIAS ABDULBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals arise out of a judgment and order rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot on 16. 07. 2002 in Sessions Case No. 31 of 2000, whereby both the appellants, namely, appellant Firoz Kalubhai, who was accused No. 2 in the aforesaid case and appellant Hitesh @ Bhavko Dave, who was original accused No. 1 in the aforesaid Sessions case came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 120b of the Indian Penal Code ('ipc, for short)and Section 201 of the IPC and each of them was ordered to undergo r. I for life and fine of Rs. 25000/- each and in default of payment of fine, s. I for three years for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w. Section 120b of the IPC and R. I for three years and fine of Rs. 10000/- each and in default of payment of fine, S. I for six months for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC. Appellant Firoz Kalubhai original accused No. 2 challenged his conviction and sentence by preferring criminal Appeal No. 640 of 2002 and the appellant Hitesh @ Bhavko dave, who was original accused No. l challenged his conviction and sentence by preferring Criminal Appeal No. 876 of 2002.

(2.) ALONG with both the appellants, total four accused persons came to be tried by the learned Sessions Judge. Original accused Nos. 1 and 2, who are appellants came to be convicted for the offences as narrated above, whereas two co-accused persons, namely, original accused No. 3 bhupat Raimal and original accused No. 4 Manjuben Bhupat came to be acquitted of the charges of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, but were convicted for the offence punishable under section 202 of the IPC, and as submitted the State did not challenge the acquittal of original accused Nos. 3 and 4 of the offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the IPC or the offence punishable under section 201 of the IPC nor the original accused Nos. 3 and 4 challenged their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 202 of the IPC.

(3.) THE prosecution case in nutshell is that on dated 1. 10. 1999, when deceased Rahul Chandrakant Parekh was proceeding on his bicycle on Lakhajiraj Road, in the city of Rajkot, at that time, he was intercepted by both the appellants and the appellants promised him that they would help him to marry Kajal. Thereafter, deceased Rahul was taken by both the appellants on a motorcycle to a room, which they had hired from original accused Nos. 3 and 4. It is alleged that deceased Rahul was kept in the room and sedative drugs were administered to him by the appellants. However, the appellants had conspired with each other to kidnap deceased Rahul for the purpose of demanding ransom amount from his father. Telephone calls were made under the pseudo name of iliyas to the father of the deceased, first informant, PW-19 chandrakantbhai demanding ransom amount. Initially, first informant chandrakantbhai informed police regarding the missing of his son Rahul. It is alleged that since the demand of ransom amount was not satisfied, both the appellants by causing bodily injuries to deceased Rahul murdered him. On 4. 10. 1999, father of deceased Rahul, PW-19 chandrakanbhai Parekh informed Rajkot City police in writing, Exh. 70 regarding the missing of his son. During the course of investigation, on the basis of the information, Exh. 70 supplied by the father of the deceased, the investigation was commenced. Initially, the investigation was on the line of finding out missing Rahul. However, during the course of investigation, statement of witness, PW-9 Dharmeshbhai Solanki was recorded. It was revealed that both the appellants were involved in the incident, and it was further revealed that Rahul was done to death by the appellants and the appellants had hired a room of co-accused Nos. 3 and 4. Both the appellants along with co-accused Nos. 3 and 4 came to be arrested. During the course of further investigation, weapons, clothes and other articles connecting the appellants with the crime came to be seized. On behalf of the State first information report was filed by PI mr. Baranda in Rajkot city police station regarding the offences. After collecting required material for the purpose of lodgment of chargesheet, chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of learned JMFC, Rajkot. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned jmfc, Rajkot committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Rajkot, which was numbered as Sessions Case No. 31 of 2000.