RAMDAYAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a joint appeal by five accused appellants against their conviction and sentences for various offences, under secs. 396, 398 and 365 I. P. C. passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City, by his judgment dated 31-8-70. The sentences awarded were life imprisonment for the offence under sec. 395, 7 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under sec. 398 and for the offence under sec. 365 each of the accused was awarded seven years rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default one year's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) ON the night between 23rd and 24th June, 1969 some miscreants came to the Nohra of PW 1 Girvarlal in village Dargavan, Tehsil Mandar. Girvarlal was sleeping in his 'nohra' along with his nephews PW 2 Mohanlal aged 14 and one Jagdish Prasad on three cots. About 11. 30 P. M. Girvarlal was aroused when two persons who had guns with them flashed their torches at him. ON seeing them Girvarlal was frightened and, therefore, he remained lying on the cot. Then he saw that 6 persons had entered into the 'nohra*. The miscreants had surrounded all the three cots. Then they accosted Girvarlal and commanded him to accompany them to his house. They further asked him to keep quiet lest he would be shot dead. Girvarlal was terrified and he accompanied the miscreants- He went to the house in which his brother Hiralal and his wife were sleeping. Girvarlal called his brother and asked him to open the door. When the door was opened all the miscreants entered into the house. They then asked Girvarlal to light a lantern, which he did, and then all of them ransacked the house. Various articles and some ornaments were taken possession of by the miscreants. Girvarlal was asked to tie a bundle which he did. Girvarlal was then taken to his shop and the miscreants carried away some pieces of cloth and cash as also some ready- made clothes from there. They asked him to produce gold and money, but Girvarlal could not and accordingly they carried away the boy Mohanlal with them. ON the way many of the articles were dropped by the miscreants. Mohanlal was carried by the miscreants to a jungle. ON the way the miscreants came across a truck and they asked the driver to stop it. The truck stopped but then the occupants who were Police people opened fire at the miscreants. The miscreants returned the fire. Mohanlal took cover behind a tree, but the miscreants were able to escape with Mohanlal. ON the following day there was again an encounter between the Police and the miscreants. There was exchange of fire. ONe of the miscreants was hit and was injured. At this the miscreants surrendered themselves and the police arrested them. Mohanlal too was found with them at the time the miscreants surrendered themselves to the police. From the accused Teekam the police recovered some ornaments and articles at the time of his arrest. The accused were kept in the Police Station Bari. They were got identified by P. W. 2 Mohanlal and P. W. 1 Girvarlal. Girvarlal identified three accused; Ramdayal son of Brijlal, Ramdayal son of Chhatarsingh, and the accused Nahne. Accused Mohammad and Teekam were not identified by him PW 2 Mohanlal identified all the five accused. The articles that were recovered by the police from the accused Teekam were identified by Girvarlal at a test parade. The articles are mentioned in the recovery list Ex. P. 10 dated 28 6-69 The list of test identification is Ex. P. 4 dated 17-7-69.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants contended that Mohanlal was a boy of 14 and there is no corroboration of his statement regarding the kidnapping or abduction, as the case may be LEARNED counsel relies on Bharvad Bhikha vs. State of Gujarat (1 ). In that case one Falji Teja was coming to his house from Bhurkhi Railway Station. When he passed over a culvert he was assaulted by three accused. Accused No. 1 in that case came from behind and gave a blow with an axe to Falji on the left leg. Falji fell down. Thereafter accused Nos. 2 and 3 ran up to the spot. Accused No. 2 was armed with a spear and accused No. 3 with a Dharia. All the three than started giving blows to Falji. As a result of the injuries Falji died on the spot and the accused ran away. Falji deceased had a gun with him which fell down during the assault and accused No. 1 carried away that gun The case depended against the accused on the evidence of one Khengar who was a young boy of about 14. He got frightened and ran away. He informed his mother about the assault on Falji. At the time of the assault Pitambar Bhura a Koli Patel was proceeding from his house in Gundi to Bhurkhi Railway Station. It is in this context that their Lordships observed that the High Court was right in seeking corroboration of Khengar's evidence even though there were no infirmities in it. Their Lordships added that as Khengar was a young boy it would be prudent to seek corroboration.