The judgment emphasizes the importance of considering all evidence, including witness testimony and recovery of stolen property, in establishing guilt. It also highlights the need for conclusive evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

1. This order will dispose of CRA-S-10555-2018, CRA-D- 244-2019, CRA-D-36-2019 and CRA-S-5504-2018 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals. These appeals have been directed against the judgment of conviction dated 28.11.2018 and order of sentence dated 30.11.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Sonepat.

2. Brief facts as culled out from the paper-books are that appellants/accused namely Anish, Rinku @ Vinay, Rajesh and Rohit @ Nawab were sent to face trial for commission of offence punishable under Sections 364-A, 343, 376-D, 376, 379-A, 411, 506 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered vide FIR No.64 dated 20.02.2017 by the Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar Sonepat. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant has three daughters and one son. His third daughter left the house in March, 2016 and a case was registered in Police Station Sadar Sonepat against accused/appellant Anish that he had called and taken away complainant’s daughter with him. His daughter was recovered on 31.12.2016 but said accused was not arrested. As per complainant, now said Anish had taken away his younger daughter i.e. prosecutrix on 18.02.2017 and he was trying to trace out his daughter. However, accused Anish had made call from his mobile No.8398038308 on his mobile No.9255284263 demanding ransom of Rs.3 lakhs for releasing his daughter. Accordingly, FIR was registered, the accused were arrested and they were charge-sheeted. The prosecution has examined witnesses PW-1 to PW-21 and the accused persons examined their defence witnesses.

3. After consideration of the case of the prosecution and on marshalling the evidence of the prosecution as also the defence witnesses, the Trial Court convicted all the accused persons who are appellants before this Court in these four appeals vide judgment of conviction dated 28.11.2018 and vide order of sentence dated 30.11.2018 the aforesaid accused persons have been awarded sentence as under:-

Furthermore, the trial court directed that all the sentences shall run concurrently. However, the period of imprisonment already undergone by the convicts during the investigation and trial of the case shall be set off against the substantive sentences under Section 428 Cr.P.C. The aforesaid impugned judgments of conviction and sentence are under challenge in these four appeals.

4. Learned counsel appearing for appellant-Rohit @ Nawab submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations against the appellant are only with regard to Section 376 and 506 of the IPC. In cross-examination the prosecutrix has admitted that neither she raised any alarm nor suffered any injury.