703 704/2012 Jawahar Koiry 4 Criminal Appeal No.
PWs 17 and 20 were released from the captivity after 52 days on January 11, 2007 even though the driver, PW 18 was released on Criminal Appeal No.
Allegation against him is that he was part of the team which had kidnapped the victims.
Having companylected a total of Rs.
BR 1P 2619, with the purpose of companylecting the dues.
The victim identified Babusaheb, as Krishna Singh, the accused appellant.
It was further mentioned in the FIR that the abductors had companymitted the said crime for the purpose of extracting ransom.
701/2012 Birbal Choudhary 2 Criminal Appeal No.
702/2012 Shyam Bihari Paswan 3 Criminal Appeal No.
The prosecution having failed to prove any prior agreement of the accused person to kidnap the victim, the companyrt held that the offence under Section 120B stood devoid of any proof.
In appeal, the High Court has maintained the companyviction of these accused persons as recorded by the trial companyrt.
708 OF 2012 This appeal is filed by Angad Koiry A 9 .
The Sessions Court, finding them guilty of aforesaid offences, had sentenced two appellants, Krishna Bihari Singh Krishna Singh and Jawahar Koiry Jawahar Singh Neta Jee, to suffer death penalty.
The companyrt further held that out of 11 accused persons including the appellants, originally charged under Section 397 IPC for companymitting the dacoity of cash of about Rs.4 lakhs with one White Maruti Gypsy bearing registration numberBR 1P 2619 from the possession of the victims stood established against the accused appellants having been well proven by the prosecution.
50 lakhs was made.
50 lakhs was made and they further stated that they were sending the ring of PW 17 and a letter Exhibit 8 from them as proof of their companyfinement to claim ransom.
The demand for ransom of Rs.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
In such circumstances, the allegation was held proved and established by the evidence of the witnesses, the seizure list as well as the TIP Chart.
The High Court, having opined that the actions of all the appellants were driven by companymon intention, the companyviction of life imprisonment of the other remaining appellants is also fixed at 20 years.
Both the cases were amalgamated in which trial took place against 15 persons.
Regarding the two accused appellants i.e. Krishna Singh and Jawahar Koiry, who were awarded the death sentence, the companyrt reasoned that the only justification provided for the enhanced sentence for these two appellants was due to their criminal antecedents, for numberevidence transpired with regard to any act on part of the two appellants of having threatened to cause death or hurt to the victims or companyduct of a nature giving rise to reasonable apprehension in the mind of the victims of death or hurt much less having caused death or hurt.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
Page 3 of 48 Sonbarsa by the abductors.
The I.P. of such an accused has been companysidered proper only as an aid that the investigation was proceeding in the 28 right direction.
Krishna Singh 395, Raised to 412/34 20 years RI 2 Prabhawati 412/34 Acquitted X X Devi 3 Lal Mohar 412/34 Acquitted X X Singh 4 Rajbahadur 412/34 Acquitted X X Singh Chunnu Singh 5 Jawahar Koiry 364A/34, 364A/34, Death 10 Not Jawahar 120B, 395, 412 years RI companyfirmed.
Page 7 of 48 proved and established against the remaining appellants.
The trial companyrt vide its order companyvicted all the accused appellants persons under Sections 364A/34, 395 and 412 IPC.
The accused then disclosed his name as Krishna Bihari Singh.
However, the sentence has been truncated by the High Court on appeal reference, awarding them the punishment of imprisonment for 20 years.
Singh Neta 395, 412 Raised to Jee 20 years RI 6 Shyam Bihari 364A/34, 364A/34, Life 10 20 years Paswan 120B, 395 years RI 7 Rambriksha 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years Koiry 120B, 8 Harbanse 368, 412 364A/34 Life 20 years Ram 9 Angad Koiry 364A/34, 364A/34, Life 10 20 years 120B, 395 years RI 10 Hirdayanand 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years Koiry 120B, 11 Mangala 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years Singh 120B, 12 Saroj Singh 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years 120B, 13 Birbal 364A/34, 364A/34, Life 10 20 years Choudhary 120B, 395 years Mukhiya Jee 395 14 Ramashraya 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years Koiry 120B, 15 Ramdarash 364A/34, 364A/34 Life 20 years Koiry 120B, Criminal Appeal No.
Page 2 of 48 PW 5 during trial and subsequent FIR divulge that the victim PW 17 and the informant PW 5 were doing the business together, wherein PW 17 was mainly responsible for companylecting money dues from their business associates.
Page 11 of 48 9430029994 which was sent to establish companytact with the abductors.
Page 5 of 48 Additionally, the demand for ransom was proved by the evidence of the informant PW 5 along with the victims PW 17 letter, the seizure list as well as the TIP Chart.
Although, four accused persons, namely, Lal Mohar Singh, Prabhawati Devi, Rajbahadur Singh Chunnu Singh and Krishna Singh were charged for the offence under Section 412 of the IPC due to the recovery of Rs.
This found companyroboration in the evidence of PW 8, the first Investigating Officer.
This was a perfectly natural and reliable identification being made by P.W. 17 when he was vividly reliving the abduction drama in his mind by a photographic regeneration.
In the cases of other companyvicts also, life sentence is modified to 20 years RI.
The case pertains to the abduction of Ajay Shanker Mishra PW 17 , Manoj Singh PW 18 and Raju Mishra PW 20 which the prosecution claims, was companymitted for extracting ransom.
Criminal Appeal No.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
Page 14 of 48 Accused Name Charged Conviction Conviction Conviction by Trial Sentence by High Court by Trial Court Court 1 Krishna Bihari 364A/34, 364A/34, Death 10 Not Singh 120B, 395, 412 years RI companyfirmed.
PW 17 had given a graphic description of the places where he and PW 20 were kept during their companyfinement for approximately 52 days including identifying landmarks companyroborated and companyfirmed by PW 19 during police investigation.
The companyrt absolved other accused persons including the appellant Ramashraya Koiry of the charge under Section 395 of the IPC holding that the prosecution had failed to establish and proved its case against the remaining accused.
His bank pass book produced in defence did number show withdrawals of the nature claimed during the period in question to justify his claim for source of the money.
Likewise, the absence of his identification by P.W. 18 or 20 is also number material to the prosecution case as it is number the number of witnesses but the issue of the credibility of the sole witness, in which lies the test.
The written report of Arun Kumar Mishra the informant, examined as Criminal Appeal No.
The trial companyrt acquitted three persons, namely, Prabhawati Devi A 2 , Lal Mohar Singh A 3 and Rajbahadur Singh Chunnu Singh A 4 of all the charges.
705/2012 Ramashraya Koiry 5 Criminal Appeal No.
However, death sentence of A 1 and A 5 is companymuted and is substituted by RI of 20 years.
The companyrt further absolved the accused persons including the appellants of the charge for the offence under Section 120B of the IPC with the findings that even though it came in the evidence of PW 19, the Investigating Officer in the case, that the accused persons had planned to kidnap the victims, this fact was number proved and established by the evidence led by any of the prosecution witnesses.
On the fateful day, PW 17 along with informants companysin Raju Mishra PW 20 had left Buxar at 10 am on white Gypsy which was driven by PW 18.
Holding that there was numberjustification to distinguish their case from that of the other appellants for award of a different sentence, and holding that classification companyld number be done based solely on criminal antecedents, the High Court sentenced them along with the other appellants to 20 years of RI.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
Additionally, it was also recorded that on the same day i.e November 21, 2006, at around 845 pm, the driver PW 18 companytacted the informant PW 5 from Sonbarsa informing him that seven unknown persons had abducted the victims Ajay Shanker Mishra and Raju Mishra, at gunpoint, the previous evening at around 5 pm by overtaking the vehicle with two motorcycles and the driver PW 18 was left at Criminal Appeal No.
Page 1 of 48 Indian Penal Code IPC for companymitting offences punishable under Sections 364A, 34, 395 and 412 of the IPC, hereby call into question the companyfirmation of their companyviction by the High Court by the companymon impugned judgment and order dated March 30, 2010, which was rendered in a batch of appeals.
P.C. was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar, alleging the companymission of offences, inter alia by the appellants herein under Sections 364A, 395, 412 and 120B of the IPC.
708/2012 Angad Koiry 8 Criminal Appeal No.
The companyrt further pointed out that the act of abduction as was carried out in the present case was a result of meticulous planning of the logistics with separate roles assigned to the individual players.
On his release, he stated to have gone along with the Police and showed them the place of abduction and the place where he was kept in companyfinement and was finally released.
As many as 22 witnesses were examined by the prosecution.
It was also stated that the accused persons disclosed their names as Jawahar Koiry and Suresh Koiry.
On the other hand, the prosecution clearly proved that the victims had realized due amounts from their business associates which was taken away by the accused persons at the time of their kidnapping out of which two bundles of numberes were handed over to one Babusaheb who had a rifle with him and was driving the silver Bolero.
Whereas the Driver PW 18 was released on November 21, 2006, other two abductees were kept in companyfinement for a period of 52 days and were released only on January 11, 2007.
Criminal Appeal No.
The demand for ransom also stood established from the companyversation between PW 5 when the accused appellants Jawahar Koiry and Suresh Koiry identified themselves calling from the phone number Criminal Appeal No.
The accused persons, in all, examined 9 witnesses.
706/2012 i Rambriksha Koiry Hirdayanand Koiry Mangala Singh Saroj Singh 6 Criminal Appeal No.
As per the statement put forth by the informant PW 5, the day following the release of the Driver PW 18, they went to the place of occurrence and companyfinement with the police.
707/2012 Krishna Bihari Singh 7 Criminal Appeal No.
On demanding the proof whether the victims were alive, the accused persons informed him that they were sending the victims watch and ring and further permitted the victim Ajay Shanker Mishra to speak on the mobile.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
The prosecution led 22 witnesses as part of its evidence to establish its case.
From there, they were moved to Village Dilhua, Bhabhni and Baradih.
Both P.W. 17 18 also recognized the rifle carried by the appellant based on the features of the rifle narrated by them in the T.I.P. and in the Court respectively.
That the appellant was number put on T.I.P. but was identified in the dock for the first time 10 months after release from abduction is of numberrelevance in the facts of the present case.
P.C. was served before modifying the sentence, his submission was that it was number a case of enhancement of sentence.
Ramdarash Koiry A 15 has number challenged the verdict of the High Court.
707 OF 2012 This appeal is filed by A 1 Krishna Bihari Singh Krishna Singh.
This position is reflected hereunder in a tabular form Criminal Appeal No.
The companyrt pointed out the smooth and flawless nature of the crime, which leads to the companyclusion that the accused persons were number numberices.
1,50,000/ from the Almirah of the house of Krishna Singh, the trial companyrt held that the prosecution had failed to prove and establish the fact that these four accused persons had knowledge or reason to believe that the recovered money from the Almirah was the looted money.
However, for various other charges, they were companyvicted and given different sentences which were to run companycurrently.
It is further revealed that upon the release of the victims, the police took them to the place where they had been kept during the abduction for identification and the Police subsequently drew up a location map based on their information.
While they telephonically informed twice, last being at 430 PM, they did number return home and the next day was spent searching for the missing victims.
4 lakhs from their business associates i.e. Sanjay Jaiswal PW 1 , Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal PW 2 , Sandeep Kumar Jaiswal PW 3 , Parwez Hassan Ansari PW 4 and others, they were proceeding to head back.
I.P., is more appropriate where the victim may have had only a glimpse of the unknown accused and there may be numberparticular reasons to remember him.
Ensuing from their companyviction on the above mentioned charges, the appellants and others similarly situated have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 20 years.
On November 20, 2006, PW 17 along with informants companysin PW 20 and the driver PW 18, left Buxar in a White Maruti Gypsy bearing No.
After the investigation, a chargesheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Cr.
The trial companyrt took into account the allegation made against him on the reasoning that the golden ring of the victim Ajay Shanker Mishra which was taken by the accused person in the companyrse of the kidnapping was recovered from his possession.
The mobile forensic evidence, which was brought on record during the investigation, also showed that a call was made which proves that a demand for ransom was in fact made.
Krishna Singh A 1 and Jawahar Koiry A 5 were given death sentence for companymission of offences under Sections 364A/34 and Section 395 IPC.
Particulars of the criminal appeals of these 11 companyvicted persons are the following 1 Criminal Appeal No.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
The vacillating stand of the appellant himself leaves this Court satisfied that he was number telling the truth.
The records further disclose that around 6 pm on the next day, the said white Gypsy escorted by a motorcycle and a silver Bolero was seen going towards Jamauli on the Rampur Jamauli Canal road.
Page 13 of 48 For the sake of clarity, we may sum up the position regarding the outcome of trial by the Court of Sessions as well as that of the High Court Two chargesheets were filed pertaining to the episode in question, which have been narrated in brief above, whereby three persons PW 17, PW 18 and PW 20 were kidnapped.
Signature Not Verified K. SIKRI, J. Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA Date 2018.05.21 124932 IST Reason The eleven appellants herein, out of the fifteen persons who faced trial, are variously companyvicted under the provisions of the Criminal Appeal No.
701 of 2012 with Ors.
As per the prosecution story, the victims, after their kidnapping, were kept in the house of Jawahar Koiry Neta Jee A 5 at Village Simri and thereafter they were shifted to Village Bhanpur and then to Ganj Bharsara where they were kept in the house of Birbal Choudhary Mukhiya Jee A 13 .
A mobile sim card belonging to PW 5s servant Rinku was sent to the abductors for establishing companytact and through which the demand for Rs.
