The conviction under circumstantial evidence requires that all circumstances must form a complete, logical chain tying the accused to the crime beyond reasonable doubt.

1. Both these criminal appeals, arising out of the same judgment and order dated 1.2.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (FTC Ist), Muzaffar Nagar in S.T. No. 184 of 2004 (State of U.P. Versus Rajesh Saini and others), were connected vide order dated 13.2.2007 of this Court and are hereby decided by this common judgment.

2. The facts in brief, if the case of the prosecution were true, reveal the tragic case of one young boy Abhishek alias Lovey, who was kidnapped for ransom and was chopped off into two parts by the accused appellants, one of whom (appellant - Vikas Sharma) the boy used to call 'uncle'. After his murder the accused appellants buried both those parts separately into the sugarcane fields.

3. The brief facts of the case as unfolded during trial are that on the fateful day i.e. 27.11.2003 the father of the deceased boy - informant Pradeep Kumar Garg, who is a practicing advocate in Tehsil Court, Jansath, district Muzaffar Nagar, had gone to tehsil Jansath for his work leaving his wife, daughter and son, deceased Abhishek, at his home. At about 3.30 P.M. his wife rang him up and informed that just after he had left, accused Vikas Sharma, (who was a friend of Pradeep Kumar's younger brother Manoj Garg and was working as a typist of Tehsil Court Jansath), had come to their house and had taken away Abhishek with him but Abhishek had neither reached his school nor had yet returned. Hearing this, the informant at once rushed to the place where typist Vikas Sharma (A - 1) used to sit at the tehsil court campus, to inquire from him about the whereabouts of his son but Vikas Sharma was not found on his seat. The informant then rushed to his home and asked about Abhishek from his wife and daughter, both of whom, while weeping informed that Abhishek had not yet returned. The informant alongwith his wife started to search his son. During search his brother - in - law (Behnoi) Rakesh Agrawal informed that he had seen Abhishek and accused / appellant Vikas Sharma going towards Prakash Chowk at about 10.00 A.M. The informant and his wife searched their son at Prakash Chowk but his whereabouts remained untraced. Searching their son when they reached at Mahaveer Chowk, Pramod Sharma, Advocate and Anuj Kumar (PW - 3) met them who informed them to have seen Abhishek in the company of accused / appellants Vikash Sharma, Rajesh Saini, Aashu and Arvind, standing in front of Swagat Hotel at about 10.30 A.M. The informant and his wife searched their son in Swagat Hotel and some other hotels also but in vain. When the whereabouts of Abhishek remained untraced till the morning of 28.11.2003 i.e. the next day of Abhishek's disappearance, the informant lodged a written report at P.S. Nai Mandi, Muzaffar Nagar on 28.11.2003 at 9.15 a.m. narrating all the aforesaid facts and expressing therein his apprehension about abduction of his son for ransom by all the accused / appellants. In the F.I.R. itself he also mentioned the names of villages of appellants Rajesh and Aashu as Kasba Jansath and village Aadampur, P.S. Khatauli, district Muzaffar Nagar, respectively.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid written report (Ext. Ka. 1), a criminal case was registered at Crime No. 541 of 2003 at P.S. Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar under S.364 IPC against all the appellants. Check F.I.R. (Ext. Ka. 4) was prepared and the investigation go