AKRAM Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon the disappearance of one Salman on 6/11/2011, a Gumshudgi/missing report was got reported by his father Shamim S/o Bundu Hasan. In the Gumshudgi report, it was stated that the younger son of Shamim had, from his telephone number 8126580512, rung up the missing son of Shamim at his phone number 8126573540 and the missing son- Salman had informed the son who had rung up that he was at Sidki, Saharanpur and he would be reaching in half an hour. However, when Salman did not reach his house, the Gumshudgi Report was got reported on 7/11/2011. This was exhibited as 'Exhibit Ka-2'. When, however, a search was made and Salman was not found then on 15/11/2011 a First Information Report was got lodged by the father of the missing son. It was categorically stated that the son of the first informant had left the house on his Tempo No.UP 11 T 5974 on 06/11/2011 in the morning and had gone to Saharanpur for the purpose of carrying passengers. It had further been stated that as per the missing report at about 11.00 A.M. on 06/11/2011, the missing son Salman had stated that he was in Sidki, Saharanpur and would come back in about half an hour. But when he did not come back by that time then, the first informant along with his relatives and acquaintances tried to search him out. In the First Information Report itself, there was an averment that the first informant was doubting that certain miscreants had kidnapped his son Salman for the purposes of murdering him. The First Information Report was lodged u/s 364 I.P.C. which gave rise to Case Crime No. 363 of 2011. The scribe of first informant was one Mohd. Mehtab. Thereupon, the investigation commenced on 27/11/2011. Akram, one of the accused was arrested at around 11.30 AM, and, from his possession, a mobile phone was also recovered. However, on the arrest, the accused Akram had stated that he had kidnapped the son of the first informant Salman with the help of his Jija known by the name of Shameen on 06/11/2011 and they together had hidden the dead body in Village Korwal Alampur, Police Station- Bhabreda, District- Haridwar, Uttarakhand by the side of a canal in an agricultural field and the mobile phone had been retained by the accused. Thereafter on 27/11/2011 after the arrest of Akram, arrest memo was prepared and it was exhibited as 'Exhibit Ka-5'. Thereafter, on 2/12/2011, the accused Shameem was also arrested and from his possession also a mobile phone was recovered and was retained with the police and the recovery memo of it was prepared as 'Exhibit Ka-9'. During the preparation of both the recovery memos vis-a-vis accused Akram and Shamim, no independent witness of the area was present.

(2.) On the information given by arrested persons- Akram and Shamim, the weapon by which the alleged murder had taken place i.e. the iron rod of around two Baalisht (around 18 inches) was also recovered. This recovery was also done without the presence of any independent witness. Thereafter, the Tempo No. UP 11 T 5974 was also recovered on 15/11/2011 and the recovery memo with regard to it was prepared as 'Exhibit Ka-18'. Thereafter, it appears that a search was made by the police of the dead body and after quite sometime on 27/11/2011, after its recovery, the inquest report was got prepared. The dead body was found in a sugarcane field. Here, it may be stated that the dead body which was found by the police was nothing else but a collection of bones. It was only a skeleton. There was no flesh found on it and the inquest report, which was prepared on 27/11/2011 in the presence of the Abdul Sattar, Riyasat, Abdul Rahman, Shamim and Mohd. Shahjad, clearly stated that the dead body was found in a state which was not recognizable and only loose bones were found. Thereafter, a post mortem was done on whatever was left of the dead body on 28/11/2011 at 12.00 noon and in post mortem report, in the coloumn where the cause of death had to be given it was categorically stated that it could not be ascertained and the doctor desired a DNA Test for the identification of the dead body and for the cause of the death. Upon investigation, having been completed, a charge-sheet was submitted by the police in the court under Ss. 364/302/201/404/411 IPC. Here it may be mentioned, Akram was arrested on 27/11/2011 and Shamim was arrested on 2/3/12/2011 and Abdul Sattar was got arrested on 13/12/2011. The Court, thereafter, on 5/2/2013 framed charges against the three accused namely Akram, Shamim and Abdul Sattar. When they denied the charges and claimed trial, the trial commenced.

(3.) From the side of the prosecution, as many as nine prosecution witnesses appeared to prove the case of the prosecution. PW-1 Narendra Kumar was a Constable who had stated in his examination-in-chief that two years prior to the recording of the statement, he was posted in Saharanpur and that he was the person who had lodged the Gumshudgi Report. He also proved the Chik of the Gumshudgi. PW-2 Shamim (father of the deceased) had, in his examination-in-chief, chronologically narrated as to in what manner, his son had disappeared on 06/11/2011. Thereafter, he had stated as to how he had lodged the missing report initially and thereafter, how the relatives and the acquaintances had tried to search out the missing son- Salman. He had thereafter stated that on 21/11/2011, Shahjad and Liyaqat whom he had met in the village had informed him that his son Salman on 06/11/2011 in the morning at about 08.00 AM was seen taking Shamim and Akram on his Tempo at Saharanpur. Thereafter, the PW-2 had stated that how on 27/11/2011, the accused Akram had taken the PW-2 and the other police personnel to the sugarcane field where the bones were discovered along with the blue pant which was smeared with blood and mud. He had also stated that a shirt with check print was also discovered. Similar was case of the baniyan. He had stated that the police had sealed all those clothes and thereafter, the dead body was taken for post mortem. In the examination-in-chief he had stated that the motive, as to why Akram had killed his son, was that he was in love with one Benazir and the same girl was also liked by Akram, the accused who wanted to marry her forcefully. In the cross-examination, he had stated that though in the First Information Report, he had stated that he had met Shahjad and Liyaqat for the first time on 21/11/2011 after the disappearance of his son, in the examination in-chief he had stated that when he was searching for his son along with the other relatives and acquaintances, then Shahjad was also searching for him.