Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J.

1. Both these proceedings arise out of a common judgment dated 31.03.2012 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Navsari in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2007. By the impugned judgment, the accused Parvez Rana was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 364, 364A and 302 of IPC, for which, in addition to fine of Rs. 10,000/-, he was awarded death sentence. He was also convicted for offences under Sections 363 and 366 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 07 years. Fine of Rs. 10,000/- each was imposed. For offence under Section 201 of IPC also, likewise he was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 07 years and fined for Rs. 10,000/-. This judgment of conviction has been challenged by the accused in Criminal Appeal No. 704 of 2012. Being a case of capital punishment, there is a separate confirmation case registered and placed before the High Court. Briefly stated the prosecution version was as under:

"One Hasmukhbhai Manilal Kachrola, first informant, PW 2, Exh. 52 resident of Navsari was working as a factory manager in a diamond polishing factory at Surat. He lived with his wife, two daughters and a son aged about 10 years named Nayan. Nayan was studying in 4th Standard in nearby Sanskar Bharati School. On 04.01.2007, Nayan had gone to his morning school which would be over at 11.30 a.m. His rickshaw driver Mohammad Hanif, PW 13, Exh. 75, as per routine, went to pick him up along with other students. All other children came but Nayan did not. He informed the school authorities but Nayan was not found at the school. He, therefore, informed Nayan's mother. Hasmukhbhai, Nayan's father had already left for work. At about 12.30 p.m., Hasmukhbhai, received a phone call from his brother Amratbhai informing him that Nayan had not returned from school and he may have been kidnapped. Hasmukhbhai immediately left Surat for Navsari in his friend's car. On the way he received a phone call from Mobile No. 9998536530 on his Mobile No. 9879071174. The caller told him that Nayan was in his custody and demanded a ransom of Rs. 50 lacs for his release. On 04.01.2007 itself, the caller called up Hasmukhbhai from the same mobile number several times. Some of these phone conversations were taped by the complainant Hasmukhbhai with the help of his friend Kishorebhai Nagjibhai. Finally, the caller agreed to accept Rs. 15 lacs for return of the child and called Hasmukhbhai to Surat Railway Station with money at night. In the meantime, Hasmukhbhai had already lodged a police complaint. He went to the railway station, as instructed. Plain clothed police men accompanied him. They searched for the kidnapper at the railway station late at night but he did not show up. At 11.49 p.m. the same night, Hasmukhbhai again received a phone from the said number cursing him for bringing other people and policemen. Next day, on 05.01.2007, Hasmukhbhai talked to the kidnapper who demanded Rs. 25 lacs and called him at Navsari S.T. Depot with money at 12 o'clock. Shortly after that however, dead body of the boy was found near railway yard at Navsari. It was packed in a plastic bag. There was a surgical tape covering the mouth and nose of the boy."

2. The entire prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence. The investigation painstakingly stitched together the evidence which would establish the guilt of the accused. Since large number of witnesses and documents are presented before the Court we would try to group such witnesses according to their relevance.

3. Medical Evidence:

"This consists of an isolated witness Dr. Sonia Rajesh Tekchandani, PW 1, Exh. 41. She was the Medical Officer at Navsari Civil Hospital at the relevant time. She had carried out the post-mortem of the deceased on 05.12.2007. In her PM note Exh. 42 she had recorded following external injuries:

"1. 1/2 cm long lacerated over gums on Rt. side upper jaw.

2. 1/2 cm wide red coloured contusion of varying length 5 to 6 in number over anterior ab