GAHC010012422014 2025:GAU-AS:14386

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./305/2014

JYOTISH DAS

S/O LAKHI RAM DAS R/O VILL- 3 NO. AAMBLA, P.S. CHAYGAON DIST.

KAMRUP, ASSAM.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

2:GANESH CH KALITA

S/O LT. SONESWAR KALITA R/O VILL- AMTOLA P.S. CHAYGAON MOUZA-

AMTOLA

CHAYGAON DIST. KAMRUP R GHY.ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.N ZAMAN, MR.A BORA,MR.S K JAIN,MR.M

HASSAN,MR.A GANGULY,MR.M P BORAH

Advocate for the Respondent : , ,MR.S SAHU,MR.P K MONDAL,PP, ASSAM,MR.N N JHA

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

ORDER

22.10.2025 Date :

Heard Mr. S. K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

2. The present criminal revision petition has been instituted assailing the Judgment dated 19.05.2014, passed by the learned Session Judge, Kamrup, Amingaon, in Criminal Appeal.No.13/2014, affirming the Judgment dated 14.02.2013, passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, No.3 Kamrup(M), in Sessions Case No.138(K)/2011, convicting the petitioner, herein, under Section 365 IPC and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 3(three) years and payment of fine of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand), in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for further 6(six) months.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that one Ganesh Chandra Kalita, on 22.05.2009, lodged an FIR before the Chaygaon Police Station, inter alia, alleging therein, that his minor daughter Sumita Kalita, aged about 12 years and a student of class viii, was kidnapped by Jyotish Das, while she had gone to her friend’s house for bringing a book.

On receipt of the said FIR, police registered the same as Chaygaon Police Station Case No.81/2009 under Section 366(A) IPC.

On conclusion of the investigation, the police laid a charge-

sheet under Section 366(A)/34 IPC against 3(three) accused persons including the petitioner, herein.

The learned Trial Court on appreciating the materials coming on record framed a charge under Section 366(A)/34 IPC against the 3(three) accused persons, including the petitioner, herein.

The charge on being read over and explained to the petitioners, they having pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, a Trial ensued.

During the Trial, the prosecution examined 7(seven) witnesses and thereafter the accused persons were examined under Section 313 CrPC.

On conclusion of the Trial, the learned Trial Court, on appreciating the evidences coming on record, proceeded vide Judgment dated 14.02.2013, to convict the petitioner, herein, under Section 365 IPC. The other co-accused i.e Bishnu Das and Brajen Das, were acquitted from the charge under Section 366(A) IPC.

On his such conviction, the petitioner, herein, was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 3(three) years and also payment of fine of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) in default, to undergo further Simple Imprisonment for 6(six)

months for the offence punishable under Section 365 IPC.

The petitioner, herein, being aggrieved by his conviction vide Judgment dated 14.02.2013, by the learned Trial Court, assailed the same by way of filing an appeal, being Criminal Appeal no.50/2013, before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Amingaon.

The Appellate Court upon appreciating the evidences coming on record during the Trial proceeded to dismiss the appeal and thereby uphold the conviction of the petitioner, herein, by the learned Trial Court.

Being aggrieved the petitioner has instituted the present proceeding.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

5. The learned Trial Court upon appreciating the evidences coming on record had drawn the following conclusions;

“17. From the above evidence on record, it is seen that apparently PW1, PW2, PW4 and PW5 are hearsay witnesses so far taking of victim is concerned. PW 2 has stated that while going out to bring a book, s