STATE OF M P Vs. JITESH KUMAR RAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On behalf of the applicant State this petition is preferred under section 378(3) CrPC for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 22.1.2014 passed by First Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge. Panna in Sessions Trial No. 142/11 whereby the respondents have been acquitted from the charge of the offence punishable under section 364A IPC.

(2.) Having heard the counsel at length, keeping in view his arguments advanced, we have carefully gone through the record of the trial Court. According to the case of the prosecution, one child Anuj aged three years was missing from his residence, on which a missing person report was lodged. Meanwhile some telephonic messages were received by the parental family of the child Anuj. whereby the concerning person who kidnapped Anuj demanded the sum of ransom to release him on which the crime was registered. Subsequently the child Anuj was traced out and on investigation the respondents were arrested and charge -sheeted for the aforesaid offence.

(3.) In order to prove the case on behalf of the prosecution, as many as 16 witnesses were examined but it is apparent that in order to prove the case, concerning boy Anuj was neither produced nor examined by the prosecution and the persons examined from the parental family of the boy namely Ranjit Sirolia [PW 1], Rakesh Gupta [PW 2], Dinesh Kumar @ Ballu [PW 3], Sunder Lal [PW 4], Nisha Gupta [PW 5], Vimla Gupta[PW 6] in these depositions have not stated any incriminating thing against any of the respondents.