The appellate court cannot affirm convictions without perusal of essential trial records; absence of records violates fair legal procedure.

Judgment :

Rajani Dubey, J.

1. Since all the appeals arise out of same crime number but having two session trial numbers, as the appellants Sanni Verma, Neeraj and Montu were absconding as such their appeals were decided subsequently, therefore, these appeals have been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. The present appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.03.2010 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC), Balod, District Durg (C.G.) in Session Trial No.09/2008, whereby all the appellants have been convicted under Sections 147, 323/149, 323/149, 506- B, 450/149 & 364/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year, RI for 1 year, RI for 1 year, RI for 2 years, RI for 10 years & RI for 10 years with default stipulations, whereas the appellants Sanni Verma, Neeraj and Montu have been convicted vide judgment dated 08.09.2011 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Balod, District Durg in ST No.71/2011 for the offence under Sections 147, 450, 506 (2), 323/149, 307/149 & 364/149 and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year, RI for 10 years, RI for 2 years, RI for 1 year, RI for 7 years & RI for 10 years with default stipulations.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18/10/2007 at about 8.00 to 8.30 p.m. when the victim namely, Virendra Bahadur Kashyap was in his house along with his wife Smt. Kiran Kashyap in village Deori the accused persons namely; Raju, Rasul Sıddiqui, Rajaram along with 9-10 friends forcibly entered his house and they enquired from Kiran Kashyap about her husband. Thereafter, the accused persons started abused the victim and assaulted him with hand and fist. When the wife of the victim resisted she was threatened by the accused persons with dire consequences. Thereafter, they forcibly took away the victim along with them and was taken to a farm house in village Rampur situated at Dongargarh Road and was kept in hostage for the entire night. According to the prosecution, the accused persons assaulted the victim and on the next day the victim was taken to Christian fellowship hospital, Rajnandgaon for medical check up by the accused/appellants and then the victim was dropped by the accused/appellant in his paternal home at Kapribhat at about 8.30 a.m. On 18/10/2007 at about 9.00 pm. the wife of the victim lodged a written complaint (Ex.P/4) before the Police of Police Station Deori, which was subsequently written down as the First Information Report (Ex.P/3). After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the appellants before the Magistrate concerned.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and material available on record. The learned Trial Court did not appreciate the oral and documentary evidence properly and did not consider omissions and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The victim himself stated in affidavit (Ex-D/2) categorically stated that present appellants have not at all participated in the crime in question. The learned Trial Court failed to examine the material witnesses Yugal Kishore, Nukum Sahu, Pappu and as such the appellants have wrongly been convicted for the aforesaid offence.

They lastly submit that the record of the Trial Court was requisite but as per office note and letter No.275 dated 26.06.2025 received from the District and Session Judge, Durg, the record of the learned Trial Court was sent on 19.10.2011 to this Court, but as per order sheet dated 08.07.2025 it was foun