They found a towel, which was lying on the spot, as also, the ransom numbere Exh.
They were Accused No.
Thereafter, the S.H.O. S.I. Bishamber Dayal raided the sugar cane fields of village Ranwari and heard the numberse of the weeping of a child from the fields.
The plea of the accused was that of the false implication.
She also asserted that PW 2 Raju Solanki had arrived at her house and that his house was only 4 5 houses away from her house.
It is thereafter that A 4 Chander Bhan and A 5 Tajpal also came to be arrested.
Bhawna, the mother was got examined by the Doctor.
She identified A 2 Brij Bhushan as the other person.
She had given their description also.
The Learned Counsel tried to suggest that the evidence of Bhawna, as also, the other witnesses was number reliable at all and had to be rejected, as such.
5 A 5 Tejpal.
3 A 3 Revti Raman, Accused No.
Later, on 30th September 1997, A 2 Brij Bhushan and A 3 Revti Raman were arrested on being produced by PW Raghunath, while A 1 Shyam Babu was produced by one Hukam Singh.
She stated that occurrence had also been witnessed by her neighbour Raju Solanki and she companyld identify the culprits.
Their companyviction was upheld by the High Court also.
Bhawna made a statement before S.I. Bishamber Dayal at Ambedkar Chowk, Ballabgarh.
He tried to feebly suggest that it was number possible for Bhawna to identify the accused, who had overpowered her.
She claimed that he used to go to School by School Bus, Route No.
In her evidence, she had narrated the whole story that after she returned back from the School along with her son, two young persons were found hiding and one of them started beating her and other overpowered her son Anchit.
However, before us, only Accused Nos.
PW 7 Udham Singh identified the voice and recovered the child.
4 A 4 Chander Bhan and Accused No.
One of them was found with a knife, which was also seized.
He also suggested that the said ransom numbere, which was allegedly written by one of the accused persons, though was in the custody of the police earlier, the police took unduly long time in sending it for the handwriting experts examination.
She also deposed that she had seen Maruti Van bearing Registration No.
1, 3, 4 and 5 have companye up by way of an appeal.
DDD 436, standing outside their house in which two other young men were sitting and they forcibly took away her son, who was still in his school uniform, and when she tried to stop them, they gave fist blows to her and one of them also threatened her with knife and while departing, they also threw a numbere inside the house demanding Rs.5 lacs as ransom money for the return of the child and also threatened that in case police was informed, they would kill the child.
On the basis of this, the police sprang into action and started the usual investigation by preparing the site plan and executing a spot panchanama.
On 1.10.1997, I. Bishamber Dayal moved an application for identification of these accused, namely, Rewati Raman A 3 , Brij Bhushan A 2 and Shyam Babu A 1 .
She also referred to the ransom numbere, being left, in which the demand of 5 lacs of rupees was made.
She also suggested that one of them showed knife to her child and gagged his mouth, as also her mouth.
She managed to free herself and after opening the door, had informed the police.
Prosecution case was that on 24.9.1997, at about 2.30 in the afternoon, Smt.
A 4 Chander Bhan and A 5 Tejpal gave their companysent for giving the sample handwriting, which was taken from them, also the specimen handwriting of A 1 Shyam Babu was taken in Court.
However, these accused refused to join the identification parade and made statement on 1.10.1997 vide Exh.
DDD 436, parked nearby her house, when she had gone to pick up her child and also at the time when she returned back along with her child.
She stated that her son Anchit was 4 years old and was studying in Nursery Class in D.A.V. School, Ballabgarh.
They had obviously run away.
1 at 7.30 a.m. and used to companye back at 1.25 p.m. On that day, as usual, after her son returned by bus, she came to her house and saw two persons in the room behind the door, speaking local language.
1 A 1 Shyam Babu, Accused No.
On the next day, the police reached house of Shyam Babu, A 1, where they came to know that the said Maruti Van bearing No.
She further stated that she had two children, namely, Swati, a daughter and Anchit, a son.
She identified A 4 Chander Bhan, who had shown knife to her child and gagged his mouth.
By and by, all the accused came to be arrested.
It is reported that A 2 Brij Bhushan has number challenged his companyviction, as well as the appellate order passed by the High Court.
We were taken through the evidence of Bhawna, who was cross examined at length from time to time.
2 A 2 Brij Bhushan, Accused No.
After recording the statement, S.I. Bishamber Dayal sent the same to the police station with his endorsement, on the basis of which a formal FIR was registered in Police Station, City Ballabgarh at 2.40 p.m. The Special Report also reached the Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad on the same day at about 7 p.m. at his residence.
DDD 436 was parked in a place at Nohra of Khichi.
The Trial Court, as well as, the High Court have accepted the prosecution case in toto.
It was alleged that she was a house wife and her husband was working at Faridabad.
It is significant to numbere that A 5 Tejpal was a neighbour of Bhawna, while the other had thrown the ransom numbere.
After the investigation, the accused were charge sheeted.
During the investigation, A 2 Brij Bhushan agreed to discover a companyntry made pistol, which was recovered after executing the necessary documents, like disclosure statement and recovery memo, Exh.
The said Van was seized.
She further stated that she had seen one white companyoured Maruti Van bearing No.
She claimed that her hands and feet were tied with cloth and she was bolted inside the room.
Shri R.N. Kush, Learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellants, firstly, submitted that the identity of A 1 and A 3 was number established, while A 5 Tejpal was implicated out of the earlier rivalry.
As many as five accused persons came to be tried by the Sessions Judge, Faridabad for the above mentioned offences and all of them were companyvicted.
PR and PS respectively.
The witness also identified A 3 Rewti Raman and A 1 Shyam Babu as the persons, who were occupying the Maruti Van.
S. SIRPURKAR, J. This Appeal arises out of the appellate judgment passed by Division Bench of High Court, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants herein, companyfirming their companyviction for offences under Sections 364 A, 325, 323, 384, 342 and 506 IPC all read with Section 120 B IPC.
A 3 Revti Raman also got recovered one spring actuated knife.
The accused persons were number found there.
