THAHAR @ RAMBAHADUR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant-accused against the judgment dated 06.03.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Panna in Sessions Trial No.123/2005 whereby the trial Court held the appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.200/-.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that on 12.02.2005 appellant- accused along with co-accused Ramsakha armed with rifles and mask on their face came to Lakhkhu's (Shivshankar) house, patwari ka purwa, village Ichauliya. They took Lakhkhu with them to show the way. At that time one Kakku @ Ashok (PW-5) and Ramdeen (PW-14) came there. Hence, the accused persons also took these two persons along with them. On the next date Kakku @ Ashok (PW-5) and Ramdeen (PW-14) came back but Lakhkhu did not return. The accused persons had assaulted Kakku @ Ashok (PW-5) and Ramdeen (PW-14). They were given a letter by the accused persons which they handed over to Rani w/o Lakhkhu in which the accused persons had demanded Rs.10,00,000/- as ransom for Lakhkhu. After 3-4 days, complainant party arranged Rs.50,000/- and went to the kidnapers. Even after getting the said amount, Lakhkhu was not released by them and they demanded additional amount of Rs.20,000/-. When Deshraj (PW-7) and Ramnath (PW- 13) went to give Rs.20,000/- to the kidnappers, they saw accused Thahar @ Rambahadur, therefore, they caught him and handed over to the police. Police seized a country made firearm and registered crime No.12/2005 against him in Police Station Dharampur, District Panna. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed under Sections 364-A and 365 of I.P.C. against the appellant and co-accused Ramsakha.

(3.) After committal of the case, charges under Sections 364-A and 365 of the Indian Penal Code has been framed by the learned Trial Court against the appellant and the co- accused, the appellant and the co-accused abjured guilt and pleaded innocence and stated that they are falsely implicated in the case.