Back
2020 Supreme(All) 718
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PRITINKER DIWAKER, RAJ BEER SINGH, JJ.
Rinku Bhurji and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 5889, 5890, 5902, 6242 of 2016
Decided On : 06-03-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Kamal Krishna, Ghan Shyam Das.
For the Respondent: J.K. Upadhyay.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 364-A, 307–Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 313 –Issue about involvement of accused – It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. The burden of proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt lies on the prosecution and it never shifts
Facts of the case: Learned counsel for the appellants submits that accused persons were not known to victim (PW-3) since before the incident, but no test identification parade was conducted to fix their identity, which creates serious doubt about the involvement of accused appellants in the alleged incident. that there are serious contradictions and inconsistencies in prosecution version – It was pointed out that as per prosecution version that PW-3 has not identified the accused persons even during his statement in Court and thus, the involvement of accused-appellants in the alleged incident is thoroughly doubtful
Finding of the court: It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt –The burden of proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt lies on the prosecution and it never shifts –Another golden thread, which runs through the web of the administration of justice in criminal cases, is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted – The net result of the above discussion is that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against any of the accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt – The trial Court has not appreciated evidence in correct perspective and committed error in convicting the appellants –Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellants is set aside and all the appellants are acquitted of the charge levelled against them –All the accused-appellants are stated to be on bail, thus, no further order is required in this regard
Result: Appeals allowed
JUDGMENT :
RAJ BEER SINGH, J.
1. These four appeals have been preferred against a common impugned judgment and order dated 15.10.2016 passed by Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Farukhabad in Session Trial No. 3 of 2015, (State vs. Rinku Bhurji and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 321/2014, under Section 364-A IPC, Police Station Kamalganj, District Farukhabad, whereby accused-appellants, namely, Rinku Bhurji, Ravindra, Kaushal Kachi, Vinod Shakya, Mulayam Singh alias Sewak Ram, Hukumi alias Ganja, Awnesh Bhurji, Babloo alias Amod Kumar and Jitendra Kumar alias J.K. alias Bajrangi have been convicted under Section 364-A of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they have to undergo one year additional imprisonment.
2. Case of prosecution is that on 01.11.2014 at around 6:00 AM, PW-3 Raju Sharma alias Tenu, aged 35 years, has left his home for going to Mainpuri by his motorcycle to collect some papers. At around 7:30 AM, PW-3 has made a call from his Mobile No. 7897114548 to his wife Rita, but after that his mobile phone has gone switched off. As PW-3 Raju Sharma did not return back to his home, his brother PW-1 Devendra Sharma and other family members made search for him, but in vain. On 05.11.2014, motorcycle of Raju Sharma was found near Daurara Bridge in unclaimed condition. Complainant/PW-1 suspected that his brother Raju Sharma alias Tenu has been kidnapped by some unknown persons with an intention to kill him and accordingly, on 05.11.2014, he reported matter to police by submitting written complaint Ex.Ka-1
3. On the basis of written complaint Ex.Ka-1, case was registered on 05.11.2014 at 11:00 am under Section 364-A of IPC against unknown persons vide FIR Ex.Ka-5.
4. Investigation of case was taken up by PW-8 Yatendra Kumar, Station House Officer of police station Kamalganj, district Farukhabad. Meanwhile on 10.11.2014, PW-1 Devendra Sharma has submitted an application Ex.Ka-2 to police alleging that some miscreants were making call to the wife of Raju Sharma, namely, Rita from mobile number 7897114548 of Raju Sharma and that they were demanding ransom of Rs. 5 lakhs for release of Raju Sharma. It is further case of prosecution that on 10.11.2014, when PW-8 Yatendra Kumar along with other police officials, was going for patrolling and reached at Fatehgarh crossing, one Chunna Lal and Pramod Kumar, who are uncle and brother-in-law (Bahnoi) of Raju Sharma respectively, met him and told that they were going to deliver ransom amount to kidnappers and the said delivery of amount has to be made at 8:00 pm near Barrier Tiraha. On this information, PW-6 S.I. Brijesh Yadav, in charge Escort Team, was also called and as per plan, all these police officials took position around Barrier Tiraha by concealing themselves in nearby bushes. After half an hour, a safari vehicle No. HR17-3587 came there and Said Chunna Lal and Pramod Kumar went near the driver of the said vehicle and delivered amount to two persons, who were sitting on rear seat of the said car. As those two persons were counting money, police party conducted raid at around 9:00 pm and apprehended three occupants of the car. Identification of these persons was revealed as Rinku Bhurji, Babloo alias Amod Kumar and Awnesh Bhurji. One country made pistol of 315 bore and one packet of Rs. 500/- notes were recovered from accused-appellant Rinku Bhurji and one country made rifle, three cartridges and two packets of 500/- currency notes were recovered from accused-appellant Babloo alias Amod Kumar. These accused persons confessed that they along with co-accused persons have abducted Raju Sharma and they have demanded ransom for his release. They further disclosed that they can get the abductee recovered. On that disclosure, the said three accused persons were taken by police to a field at village Ggaia but there accused Jitendra Kumar alias J.K. alias Bajrangi, Vi
