RAJESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As all these three appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 28.02.1997 passed by Additional, Sessions Judge II, Gaya in Sessions Trial No. 393 of 1994/24 of 1994 convicting and sentencing appellants Rajesh Kumar Singh and Madan Singh, both appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 1997 and appellant Lallu Singh, appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1997 and appellant Sanjay Kumar Singh, appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 165 of 1997 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence committed under Section 364 of Indian Penal Code (In short "IPC"), rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence committed under Section 387 of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence committed under Section 120-B of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for five years from the offence committed under Section 365 of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence committed under Sections 302 / 34 of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence committed under Section 201 of IPC but ordering all the sentences to run concurrently, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Case of prosecution, in short, is that on 29.9.1992, informant Bijay Kumar Jaiswal (PW 13) submitted a written report (Exhibit-4) at Kotwali Police Station, Gaya stating therein that his father Badri Prasad Jaiswal aged about 58 years as usual left the house at about 5 a.m. for morning walk but did not return till 3 p.m. and in the meantime at about 10 a.m., he received a telephone call from some unknown person giving him information that his father was in custody of the caller and if he wanted his safety, he be prepared to pay a sum of rupees five lacs which was being realised from him in lieu of releasing his father safely. He was further informed that further information he will receive on phone and was also given threatening that in case he informed the police, his father would be killed. On the basis of this written report, police registered a case under Sections 365 and 387 of IPC against unknown by drawing a formal First Information Report (Exhibit-3) and investigation was taken up. During investigation, informant on 3.10.1992, submitted his report (Exhibit-6) before police stating therein that his father and appellant Rajesh Kumar Singh were running a cinema hall named as Pawan Picture Palace, Nawada in partnership and a dispute arose between them and appellant Madan Singh, father-in-law of appellant Rajesh Kumar, had asked Badri Prasad Jaiswal on telephone to make payment of entire dues of his son-in-law within one week failing which action would be taken. Informant suspected that appellant Rajesh Kumar, his father-in-law appellant Madan Singh and his relative appellant Lallu Singh, in conspiracy, kidnapped his father and might have committed his murder. On 12.11.1992, appellant Sanjay Kumar Singh produced one silver ring taking it out from a box of his house before police and on 15.12.1992, statement of co-accused Babulal Tiwary (now dead) was recorded under Section 164 of Criminal Procedure Code in which he named appellants Rajesh Kumar, Madan Singh, Lallu Singh, Sanjay Singh and others and further stated that on 30.9.1992, he saw that Badri Prasad Jaiswal was surrounded by them in the house of co-accused Upendra Singh where co-accused Upendra Singh and appellant Rajesh Kumar fired from their pistols and committed murder of Badri Prasad Jaiswal. On 18.12.1992 on the disclosure made by co-accused Babulal Tiwary, clothes of Badri Prasad were recovered from the bank of Falgu river and on the same day, co-accused Babulal Tiwary produced one pair of shoes of Badri Prasad Jaiswal before police which he had brought from the roof of his house and on 27.5.1993, appellant Rajesh Kumar Singh produced one golden ring and one silver ring of deceased before police taking them out from the box of his house and, thereafter, statement of witnesses, namely, Surajdeo Singh (PW 6), Surendra Kumar Singh (PW 8), Krishna Thakur (PW 5) and Upendra Kumar (PW 9) were recorded under Section 164 of Criminal Procedure Code. The kidnappers also sent letters to informant through registered post and demanded a sum of rupees three lacs from him for release of his father and gave threatening that they would not release the victim and would kidnap him also if information to police or any other person was given and informant also received letter of his father in which he was asked to arrange the money and pay the same to kidnappers. The recovered clothes, rings and shoes were put on test identification parade which were identified by the informant and his family members. The police, after completing the investigation, submitted charge-sheet under Sections 364, 302, 201, 387 of IPC and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya took cognizance of the case. The case of co-accused Satish Sharma, Niwas Sharma and Upendra Sharma who were absconding even from the beginning and of co-accused Jai Singh who absconded after commitment of the case was separated. After sometime, co-accused Jai Singh was remanded in this case and was put on trial. In the trial before the Court below, besides appellants, co-accused Panna Singh and Jai Singh also faced trial but they were not held guilty and they were acquitted. The appellants and Babulal Tiwary who had filed Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 1997 but who died during the pendency of the appeal were held guilty and convicted and sentenced, as indicated above.

(3.) The case of appellants is of total denial of charges and their complete innocence. One witness on their behalf has been examined.