PANKAJ NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-appellant Pankaj Naik has been convicted under Section 364, I.P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack.

(2.) The prosecution case, shortly stated, is that on 16-4-1990 at about 7 p.m. while Sanjaya Kumar Sahu, a boy aged about 9 years (P.W.3) was going to witness 'RAMLEELA' that was going to be staged in a rostrum located in the midst of his village Gholpur, the accused- appellant met him near a half constructed house of one Prafulla Raut and directed him to bring seven china roses (Mandar flowers) kept there and on his refusal to go there, the accused-appellant physically lifted and took him inside the said house, gagged his mouth and pressed his neck. On hearing the cry of P.W. 3 many villagers assembled at the spot and found the accused-appellant running away after scaling over a half constructed window of that house leaving P.W. 3 who was unconscious. Some villagers took P.W. 3 to his parents house whereas some others chased and apprehended the accused-appellant who thereafter was left in charge of the Gramarakshi of the village ( not examined). On the next day i.e., 17-4-1990 at about 1p.m. in the afternoon Kulamani Sahu (P.W. 2), the paternal uncle of P.W. 3 went along with P.W. 3 to Banki Police Station and lodged the First Information Report, Ext. 1/1. The police arrested the accused-appellant who was produced at the Police Station by the Gramarakshi and sent P.W. 3 and also the accused-appellant for medical examination inasmuch as both had sustained injuries on their persons. During investigation it came to light that at the instance of his coaccused Kishore Patnaik, the accused-appellant, for monetary gain, had kidnapped P.W. 3 in order that he may be sacrificed before a deity on some future date and accordingly after completion of investigation charge-sheet having been placed the accusedappellant faced trial for the offences punishable under Sections 364 and 307, I.P.C., whereas his co-accused Kishore Patnaik was tried for the offences punisnable under Sections 364, 307 read with Section 109, I. P.C.

(3.) The defence was one of complete denial. According to the accused-appellant, the case had been falsely foisted against him out of his previous enmity with villagers. No witness was, however, examined in support of the defence plea.