JUDGMENT

G.N. Ray, J.-These appeals have been filed under Section 19 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter referred to as TADA) against convictions and sentences passed by the learned Judge. Designated Court, Nasik in Special Case No. 1 of 1993 by Judgment dated September 21, 1994. Five accused including the three appellants were tried for offences under Sections 143, 364, 368, 385, 302 read with Section 120B and Section 140 IPC and Section 3(2)(1) of TADA.

2. The prosecution case in short is that on September 15, 1992, the complainant Kantilal Katyare returned to his house at about 8.15 P.M. He was then informed by his wife that his grandson Vaibhav had gone with the accused No. 3 Girdhari who is the appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 319 of 1995 on a scooter to bring the price of casio piano since sold by Vaibhav but Vaibhav had not returned. Suspecting something Foul, Vaibhav s father had gone in search of Vaibhav. At about 9.30 P.M. Vaibhav s father Vijay informed the complainant on phone that Vaibhav could not be traced. He had, therefore, gone to the Deolali Camp police station. The complainant had also informed the police on phone to search Vaib