Patna High Court
Ashok Kumar Singh "Viyogi" And Etc. vs State Of Bihar on 19 November, 1999
Equivalent citations: 2000CRILJ1907
JUDGMENT R.N. Sahay, J.
1. In Sessions Trial No. 42/89/74/92 five persons were placed on trial having been charged that they abducted Devesh Kumar Thakur alias Guddu for committing his murder. The accused were also charged under Sections 365, 387 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Learned trial Judge acquitted Thithar Paswan, Somariya Devi and Dinesh Singh. The appellants have been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for the offence under Section 364, Indian Penal Code, 7 years imprisonment for the offence under Section 386, Indian Penal Code and 4 years imprisonment for offence under Section 365, Indian Penal Code.
2. Two separate appeals have been preferred by the convicted accused from jail. The appellants were refused bail and they have practically served out their sentence.
3. The case of the prosecution and the evidence in support thereof may be stated as follows. On 27-2-1988 Devesh Kumar Thakur alias Guddu son of Indrakant Thakur had gone to attend his I.Sc. classes at Ram Sakal Singh Science College, Dumra, Sitamarhi. He did not return till late in the evening. At 9.00 p.m. one Rickshaw Puller who disclosed his name as Ram Nandan Das brought a letter to the first informant Indrakant Thakur written on a paper of Cigarette packet containing a message that Devesh was ill but was safe and would return by Monday or Tuesday. The Rickshaw Puller also informed that the letter was given to him by one unknown in order to deliver the same to the informant and he was paid Rs. 3/- for this purpose. The Rickshaw Puller also told the informant that the boy who had delivered the letter to him had told him that he would wait at Dumra Bus Stand. Indrakant Thakur went to Dumra Bus Stand but the boy was not found there. A search was made for Guddu but he was not found.
4. After five days, another Rickshaw Puller Upendra Paswan came to Indrakant Thakur and delivered him a letter and said that he was paid Rs. 3/- and was asked to deliver the letter to Indrakant Thakur. Indrakant Thakur went to Bus Stand but the person who had delivered letter was not found there. The contents of the letter was demand of Rs. 75,000/- for release of the boy. In the said letter informant was given direction to reach Balmiki Nagar near electric pole No. 190 on Thana Road with Rs. 75,000/-. It was also written in the letter that beneath that electric pole one stone having 'X' mark in red colour would be found where further instruction would be given. The informant was asked to reach that place at 12 midday on 6-3-1988.
5. The informant along with police party reached Balmiki Nagar on 6-3-1988 and found the stone having 'X' mark (material Ext.-II) in red colour. When the stone was removed, another letter was found. That letter contained direction that on road which goes to Bagha at the first culvert on the right side there will be 'X' mark and one person will be waiting there on whose shirt on the back side there will also be 'X' mark in red colour and money was to be delivered to that person who would give further direction for release of the boy. The informant and the police party followed the direction and reached the place as indicated in the letter. A person was found there on whose shirt on the back side 'X' mark was there in red colour. That man was caught. He disclosed his name as Ram Sakal Verma. From his pocket another letter was received which was to the effect that the informant would receive his Amanat from tea ship of Shankar situated at Narain Ghat.
6. In the written report (Ext.-1) age of the boy was described as 15 years. It was also stated that several letters were sent to the informant by post demanding ransom of Rs. 75,000/- for release of Guddu.
7. After few days of arrest of Ram Sakal Verma on 3-4-1988 Bhandari Paswan another Rickshaw Puller went to Naka No. 3 situated near the Bus Stand, Dumra and informed the Havaldar Ramashray Singh that a man was giving him a letter to deliver at the power house and the man was waiting near the Bus Stand, Dumra and the man was being watched by Upendra Paswan. The Havaldar along with Bhandari Paswan rushed to the Bus Stand and found that a man was writing a letter. He was caught and arrested. He was appellant Ashok Kumar Viyogi. It has come in evidence that Ashok Kumar Viyogi had come to the residence of the first informant three-four times between April, 1986 and February, 1988 and had once stayed for 3-4 days on the basis of previous acquaintance in the year 1986 while the informant was going to Darbhanga in connection with the marriage negotiation of his daughter. The appellant Ashok Kumar Viyogi had also developed intimacy with the boy Guddu. According to the prosecution, various letters were received by the informant written by appellant Ashok Kumar Viyogi.
8. The boy was not recovered. On 9-10-1988 the informant received a letter in which an information was given that his son was being kept at Kanti in the custody of Somariya Devi wife of Thithar Paswan. On 21-11-1988 the informant went there with the police but the boy was not found there. Photograph of Guddu was shown to Somariya Devi. She disclosed that the boy had come to her place earlier but she expressed wherebouts of the boy. From the possession of Ashok Kumar Viyogi some letters written by Kaushal Kishore Singh was recovered.
9. The evidence of Rickshaw Puller Upendra Paswan (P.W. 1) is that the appellant Ashok Kumar Viyogi was the man who had asked him to deliver the letter to the informant. Bhandari Paswan, another Rickshaw Puller (P.W. 2) was also givn a letter to deliver at the power house. Bhandari Paswan had gone to the house of Upendra Paswan and asked him to identify the person who had delivered him a letter. He identified the man as Ashok Kumar Viyogi. Ashok Kumar Viyogi was arrested on the identification of Upendra Paswan. He was also identified by Bhandari Paswan. The informant identified Ashok Kumar Viyogi as the person who had stayed at his residence. The letters (Ext. 2/2 and 2/4) were recovered from the possession of Ashok Kumar Viyogi when he was arrested at the Bus Stand. These letters contained demand of ransom.
10. Learned trial Judge has accepted the evidence and held that Ashok Kumar Viyogi was the man behind the abduction of Guddu and this appellant along with appellant Ram Sakal Verma had abducted Guddu to collect money.
11. Miss Pallavi Mishra, Amicus Curiae strongly pleaded that the evidence brought on record fails to substantiate the charge against the appellants that they had kidnapped Guddu.
12. There can be no doubt that Ram Sakal Verma and Ashok Kumar Viyogi had hand in the kidnapping of Guddu. There is convincing substantial evidence against these two appellants who were party to the conspiracy to kidnap Guddu alias Devesh Kumar Thakur for extorting ransom from his father. The boy was not recovered till the conclusion of the trial. I find no merit in these two appeals and they are accordingly dismissed but in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence of the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them.