The court affirmed the conviction for kidnapping based on substantial witness testimony but acquitted for theft due to lack of evidence.

1. All the four appellants on being found guilty were convicted under S.364A read with S.120 - B and also under S.379/120 - B of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for an offence under S.364A / 120 - B and further to undergo R.I. for three years for an offence under S.379/120 - B of the Indian Penal Code .

2. One Mica factory belonging to Alok Rajgaria situate at Tundi Road, Giridih. The proprietor Alok Rajgaria a resident of Kolkata used to visit his factory at Giridih once or two in a month.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 12-6-2002 Alok Rajgaria left Howrah for Dhanbad at 6.30 a.m. by Satabdi Express. Before he left, he instructed his driver, Jitendra Kumar Rai (appellant) to take his car to Dhanbad on 11-6-2002 itself so that he may receive him at Dhanbad Station in the next morning to come to Giridih. Upon reaching Dhanbad Alok Rajgaria made a call to the Head office at Kolkata at 9.20 a.m. about his arrival at Dhanbad. When he did not reach Giridih till 1 p.m. a staff of the factory at Giridih informed about it to the Head office at Kolkata as generally he used to reach Giridih from Dhanbad by 11.30 a.m. When Dilip Kumar Rajgaria (PW 4), elder brother of Alok Rajgaria, came to know that his brother has not reached Giridih, he sent one Kaushik Chatterjee, the informant (PW 5) to Dhanbad. By the time he reached to Dhanbad, a staff from Giridih had also reached at Dhanbad. They made enquiry in this respect and came to know that the appellant Jitendra Kumar Rai, who had stayed in the house of Balram Prasad had left for station at 8 a.m. But nothing further could be known about the whereabouts of Alok Rajgaria and his driver. Therefore, on 13-6-2002, the said Kaushik Chatterjee submitted a written information suspecting therein that someone with a view to extort money has kidnapped Alok Rajgaria.

4. Further case of the prosecution is that in the late night of 13-6-2002 a call was received by Dilip Kumar Rajgaria (PW 4) the elder brother of the victim Alok Rajgaria whereby miscreants informed him about the kidnapping of his brother and asked for heavy ransom. Dilip Kumar Rajgaria informed about it to the Superintendent of Police, who asked him to have I.D. caller on telephone. When on the next day i.e. on 14-6-2002 a call was made again, number was known and then from the office of Reliance, it could be detected that the Mobile belongs to Pappu Singh and Pinku Singh. Upon locating the place, a raid was laid at a house which belonged to Pappu Singh and Pinku Singh (both appellants) from where Alok Rajgaria and the driver were recovered and one person Sushil Kumar Roy, the appellant who was guarding them by having gun was arrested.

5. Thereafter the police took the statement of the victim under S.161 and also got his statement recorded under S.164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure . From his statement it transpired that while he was coming to Giridih on his car being driven by the driver Jitendra Kumar Rai (appellant), some miscreants got the car stopped on the road and then he as well as the driver were overpowered and were brought to a place where they were confined in a room. On being asked, he made a call to his brother (PW 4) on one day and the other call on the next day. The miscreants asked for ransom from his brother. The victim also disclosed before the police about the conduct of the driver suggesting his hand also in the alleged offence.

6. On completion of investigation, police submitted charge - sheet against these four appellants as well as Manoj Kumar Sinha and Shiv Kumar Singh.

7. On committal of the case, all the