V.N.Sinha, J.

1. Death Reference Case No. 4 of 2007 and Cr. Appeal Nos. 836, 887, 960 and 1006 of 2007 arise out of judgment and order dated 6/7.6.2007, passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Trial No. 302 of 2006/76 of 2006, whereunder each of the two appellants Manoj Kumar Singh and Yogendra Singh has been convicted for the offence under Sections 364-A, 302, 201 and 120-B of the Penal Code and sentenced under Sections 364-A and 302 of the Penal Code to death with direction to be hanged by neck till they are dead. No separate sentence, however, has been awarded under Sections 120-B and 201 of the Penal Code. Appellants Raju Kumar Gupta and Raghubir Singh have been convicted under Sections 364-A/34, 302/34, 201/34 and 120-B/34 of the Penal Code and each has been awarded imprisonment for life under Sections 364-A/34, 302/34 of the Penal Code and seven years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 201/34 and 120-B/34 of the Penal Code respectively with direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. Death Reference Case No. 12 of 2008 and Cr Appeal No. 782 of 2008 arise out of judgment and Order dated 25/28.6.2008, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Aurangabad in Sessions Trial Nos. (1) 319 of 2007/126 of 2007, (2) 351 of 2007/186 of 2007 and (3) 99 of 2007/194 of 2007, whereunder appellant Kameshwar Singh, Upendra Singh and Anuj Singh has been convicted under Sections 364-A/34, 302/34, 201/34 and 120-B/34 of the Penal Code and each sentenced under Sections 364-A and 302 read with Sections 201/34 and 120-B/34 to death with direction to be hanged by neck till he is dead. As the aforesaid two judgments dated 6/7.6.2007 and 25/28.6.2008 have been rendered in connection with Barun P.S. Case No. 165 of 2005, G.R. No.2330 of 2005 and the witnesses examined in the two trials are common, the references and the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Prosecution case, as set out in the First Information Report of the aforesaid Barun P.S. Case No. 165 of 2005, Exhibit-5 is that, Uday Kumar Singh, the informant on 30.12.2005 at about 10.30 a.m. had gone to Barun Hydel to attend his duty where he received a call on his mobile from his home that his elder son Tej Pratap, aged about six years had gone to the neighbouring shop to purchase snack and has not returned for over an hour. The informant came back home and inquired in the household and searched his son in the nighbourhood and the nearby grocery shop.. When the son could not be traced, Barun Police Station was also informed that his elder son has gone missing. Having informed Barun Police Station the informant also asked, his men to search his son and also informed his relatives telephonically that his son has gone missing. When informants son could not be traced until late in the evening, the informant apprehended that his son has been kidnapped by unknown miscreants and he lodged written report, Exhibit-3 dated 30.12.2005 at 22 hours giving description of victims appearance and attire. On the basis of written report, First Information Report, Exhibit-5 alleging offence under Section 364 of the Penal Code was drawn against unknown accused. Sri Yogendra Paswan, Officer-in- Charge. Barun Police Station himself took up the investigation of the case and examined under Section 161, Cr PC on 30.12.2005 itself the parents and other family member of the victim including the grocery shop owner Rekha Devi where Tej Pratap had gone to purchase snack and they all supported the fact that Tej Pratap had gone to the nearby grocery shop of Rekha Devi, known as Shubham Kirana Store, for purchasing snack (Takatak) on 30.12.2005 at about 10.30 a.m. and having purchased the snack while coming back he became traceless and could not be found. The Superintendent of Police Aurangabad, having learnt of the kidnapping of Tej Pratap, formed two special task Force for recovery of the victim boy under his