SHRIPAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment dated 17-9-2001 of the learned Sessions Judge, Karauli, whereby appellants- Shripat and Makhan Lal were convicted and sentenced as under: u/s. 364-A IPC, to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer three months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) AS per prosecution story, FIR was registered on the basis of Parcha Bayan of Mulya S/o Shri Khasa Jatav, aged 70 years, R/o Mogepura, P. S. Mandrayal, on 19-12-1999 at about 8. 30 PM. In the report, informant Mulya stated that about 12 days prior to Deepawali he had gone to his hut set up by him in the "dang" (ravines) of Tushmaee where he used to keep his cows. At some distance, other villagers had also set up their huts. On the night of the occurrence, while he was sleeping in his hut, he was asked to get up and he saw six persons standing near his cot. Amongst them Shripat, Ramraj, Rajkamal and Makhan were from his village and they were armed with `lathies' and `gandasies'. The other two were dacoits Ram Babu Mallah and Diwan Singh Mallah who were armed with guns and whose names he came to know later on. All of them took him towards Ghatiya. He pleaded them to set him free. The first four persons named above who belonged to his village asked the other two armed dacoits to shoot the informant. Then all of them took him upto water pond of ayagaon and then the aforesaid four persons from his village handed over him to the dacoits and they returned back to the village. From there he was taken by Rambabu Mallah and Diwan Singh Mallah (both dacoits) in the forest of Madhya Pradesh. On out break of the day, he was blind folded and hands were tied. They used to keep him tied as aforesaid in the day and in the night they used to take him along with them. During this period, he came to know about the names of the aforesaid two dacoits, Ram Babu Mallah and Diwan Singh Mallah. These two dacoits also told him that they had informed his all the four sons to bring money as ransom but they were not turning up. On 19-12-1999 in the morning when he was taken from one place to other place in the Jungle, two dacoits saw the police coming towards them, therefore they tried to take him with them but the police approached them so they had to leave him behind and run in the Jungle. The police party rescued him and took him Police Station Sar-Mathura from where he came to Police Station Mandrayal with the police where the aforesaid report was lodged. Informant Mulya also reported that due to enmity with the aforesaid named four persons from his village, he was abducted as aforesaid. On this report, case u/s. 365 r/w 120-B IPC and section 11 of the Rajasthan Dacoity Affected Areas Act, 1986 was registered at police station Mandrayal on 19-12-1999 at 8. 30 PM.

(3.) FROM the aforesaid evidence, it is clear that the trial Court has acquitted accused Gulab and Chhinga on the ground that in the Parcha Bayan or in his statement before the court, the informant Mulya the person abducted and held hostage had named Shripat, Makhan, Ramraj and Rajkamal along with two dacoits who forcibly abducted him and he did not name or in any way implicated accused Gulab and Chhinga. Therefore, we find that the case of the present appellants Shripat and Makhan Lal stands on different footing.