When they reached the 5th Main Road, A 2 was there.
Appellant No.1 additionally was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months on each companynt for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 507 IPC.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J The appellants faced trial for alleged companymission of offences punishable under Sections 363, 368, 506 and 507 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
However, he found fault with the manner in which they had dealt with the matter.
In the meantime, PW 1 had been informed over the phone by A 1 that he had kidnapped his child and he would be killed if he failed to pay Rs.3 lakhs.
In appeal by the State, by the impugned judgment the High Court held that the appellants were guilty of offences punishable under Section 363 read with Section 34 IPC and were also liable to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ .
He had clearly stated that the person who had spoken over the telephone had demanded a lump sum of Rs.3 lakhs for returning his child, lest he would be killed.
He was also threatened that if he reported the matter to the police, he would be done to death.
A 1 told him that he had already taken permission from his class teacher.
However, PW 3 became suspicious and asked A 1 to take him to his house.
The background facts and the findings of the trial Court are as follows Niranjan PW 3 is the son of Sudhakar Kamat PW 1 and was studying in St. Anthonys school.
All the three of them went by motor bike.
After verifying this, they came back and companylected some fake currency numberes and put it in a bag and returned to the same spot where this kumkum and lemon was kept, they left the bag there and kept watch on the ground.
The fact that A 1 had telephoned at about 4.30 p.m. is spoken to by Rajendra PW 7 who is a rice mill owner and also P.V. Hegde PW 11 who is working as a manager in the shop.
At about 6.30 p.m. A 2 came to the spot and he was attempting to take the bag kept by these witnesses.
Then A 2 told him that he had lost his ring and so saying he went to search for the lost ring.
From a careful scrutiny of the evidence, the High Court was fully satisfied that their evidence is most natural and they had absolutely numberaxe to grind against A 1 and A 2 and they have numberill will against them.
It was directed that in case the fine is paid, a sum of Rs.1,000/ was to be paid to Niranjan PW 3 the victim.
So the evidence of PW 3 gives a clear picture as to how these accused persons kidnapped him and held him in the forest.
State filed an appeal before the High Court.
Therefore, this fact was informed to these witnesses and they went to the indicated place and verified where they found the kumkum and lemon kept near a rock.
Immediately they apprehended A 1.
Accused persons supported the trial Courts order.
But the fact remains that he had telephoned and those calls were received by PW 1 who is numbere other than the father of PW 3.
When PW 3 enquired about his brother in law Dr. Prabhu, A 1 told him that he would find out about his brother in law.
Thereafter, all the persons came to the house of PW 1 and subsequently they produced him before police.
Stand of the State was that acting on surmises and ignoring vital evidence, the trial Court had directed acquittal.
He told PW 3 that Dr. Prabhu who is PW 3s brother in law had asked him to take PW 3 whereupon PW 3 told him that he companyld number go out without the permission of his teacher.
He therefore directed acquittal.
Information was lodged with police and the apprehended accused persons were handed over to police.
He has identified all the M.Os.
It is numberdoubt true both PWs 7 and 11 companyld number know what he had spoken or to whom he had telephoned.
On 16.2.1989 at about 4.00 p.m. when Niranjan PW 3 was in his class, his friend Sachin informed him that somebody wants to see him.
PW 3 had made some sound with his legs as he heard the voice of Narasimha Barakura PW 5 who is his brothers friend.
PW 1 was also informed that he had to keep the money in a place where kumkum and lemon were placed and he had also mentioned the place where exactly that rock was located.
Thereafter, they went into a forest for about 2 furlongs where A 1 companylected his phone number.
After investigation was companypleted, charge sheet was filed.
Inside that there was a bag which had small ropes and a knife.
They learnt as to what had happened to PW 3.
Thereafter, they all went to the school and enquired from one teacher and also the friends of PW 3.
However, he mustered companyrage and telephoned his nephew Sri Prakash who came to him with his friend Narasimha Barakura PW 5 .
In the meantime, these persons caught hold of him and on enquiry he revealed that A 1 was holding PW 3.
The appellants are described as A 1 and A 2 hereinafter.
The trial Court directed acquittal of the present appellants being of the view that the accusations have number been established.
PW 3 who is a victim has given a clear picture as to how he was kidnapped and how he was companyfined in the forest and how they companytacted his father PW A 1 had used their telephone between 4.30 and 6.00 p.m. which would indicate that he had companytacted PW 1.
PW 24 Mahadev, ASI has received the companyplaint and registered the case on 16.2.1989 at about 11.45 p.m. and prepared the FIR.
Accordingly the judgment of the trial Court was set aside and the appellants were companyvicted as afore noted.
He searched the person of A 1 and found one hand bag and a shirt.
The above version was unfolded during trial.
Narasimha Bakakura, Lateef and Govind produced before him the accused and also PW 3.
According to PW 11 at 6.00 p.m. A 1 telephoned to some one.
Accused persons pleaded innocence.
At about 6.30 p.m. A 1 came back and discussed something privately with A 2.
Thereafter, he was taken in his motor bike as a pillion rider.
Accordingly, PW 3 went out of his class room and saw A 1 standing near a motor bike.
PW 23 Seetharam had seen A 1 with others near Kerki and he learnt that PW 3 was kidnapped by A 1.
Accordingly, all of them took A 2 to that place and apprehended A 1 who was holding PW 3 as stated above.
Therefore, he companyld number immediately inform the matter to the police.
According to the learned Magistrate, these petitioners should have taken police assistance before apprehending the accused.
Then they flashed a torch light and saw that PW 3 was being held by A 1.
PW 3 was a minor then.
