Punjab-Haryana High Court
Triveni Tanti And Others vs State Of Punjab on 22 July, 2013
Author: Fateh Deep Singh
Bench: Hemant Gupta, Fateh Deep Singh
Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009
Date of Decision: 22.07.2013
Triveni Tanti and others
..... APPELLANTS
VERSUS
State of Punjab
..... RESPONDENT
And Crl. Appeal No.D-974-DB of 2009 Ashok Kumar Tanti ..... APPELLANT VERSUS State of Punjab ..... RESPONDENT . . .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH
. . .
PRESENT: - Mr.Sanjeev Manhas, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. Pavit Mattewal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
. . .
FATEH DEEP SINGH, J
Vide this judgment, the above mentioned two appeals by the convicts would be disposed as both of these matters are an outcome of common judgment and order of sentence dated 12.10.2009 of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur.
The facts are that on 03.12.2005, at about 5.00 P.M. Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 2 Raunak Rawat PW-16 a young boy aged around 06 years son of complainant Vishwanath Rawat @ Vishal PW-1 had gone out of his house at Sunder Nagar, Hoshiarpur to play with other children but did not return back. A missing report was lodged with the police on 04.12.2005 vide DDR No.4 dated 04.12.2005 Exhibits PD/DC and it was suspected that the child might have been kidnapped by some unknown persons with a bad intention or to extract money by way of ransom from his father who was running a stall of Garam Masala in front of spinning mill Purhiran in the fish market, Hoshiarpur. On his statement Exhibit PA endorsement Exhibit PA/1 was made by the Investigating Officer SI Lashkar Singh PW-11 leading to the registration of the present FIR Exhibit PA/2 by ASI Bakhshish Singh. It was thereafter on 05.12.2005, around 10.00 A.M. a telephonic call was received at the house of Dr. Lal Bahadur PW-10 whereby a ransom amounting to Rs.2 lacs was demanded and it was threatened that in case of failure to meet the demand, the child would be put to death. Thereafter, on 06.12.2005, the complainant received on his mobile No.9417478444 another demand of ransom for the same very amount followed by another call the same very day. Meanwhile, SI Lashkar Singh PW-11 visited the place from where the child was kidnapped and prepared rough site plan Exhibit PH of the place and it is when the ransom calls were put to monitoring on 07.12.2005, the police party headed by Inspector Mohinder Singh PW-14 and PW-18 ASI Harbilas Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 3 Singh that a raid was conducted at the house of one Jito deceased in Santu Balmik Mohalla Garha, Jalandhar and from the room of first floor Chaubara, the present accused Nand Lal, Jag Narain, Triveni Tanti, Jatinder Kumar Tanti, Munna and Ashok Kumar Tanti were apprehended, who had in their custody the victim Raunak Rawat. The child was identified by PW-2 Dodh Nath Rawat, his uncle and the child was taken care of through memo Exhibit PC regarding which place of recovery site plan Exhibit PC/1 was prepared and all the accused were formally arrested and served with formal memos Exhibits PW18/A, PW18/B, PW18/C, PW18/D, PW18/E, PW18/F, PW18/G, PW-18, PW18/H, PW-18/J, PW18/K and PK/1. From the room, the police lifted three glass tumblers through PW-3 SI Jaswinder Kaur and prepared them into separate parcels through memo Exhibit PD and it was by way of photographs and through report Exhibit PR, the same were opined to be of accused Trivani Tanti, Jatinder Kumar, Nand Lal, Jagnarain, Munna and Raunak Rawat and at the spot the police recorded statement of PW-7 Tajinder Singh @ Boby occupant of the house, who detailed the owner as Jito, who had died some time back and that the present accused whom he identified had taken this room on rent about 15 days prior to this occurrence and also testified the recovery of the victim from their custody. Even at the time of arrest of the accused, the recovered glass tumblers have been proved to be carrying finger prints of some of the accused detailed above. Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 4
During the course of investigations, the police recorded the statements of PCO owners PW-8 Ram Parkash, PW-9 Sukhjinder Singh, PW-13 Raghbir Singh and PW-15 Charanjit Singh and it was thereafter the child was produced before the learned Magistrate PW-17, who recorded the statement of the child under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by way of documents Exhibits PW-17/A and PW-17/B and issued certificates Exhibits PW-17/A/1 and PW-17/B/1.
During the course of investigation, the police recorded the statements of the witnesses and through memo Exhibits PJ, PN, PO, PP, PF, PG took into possession the call details of the telephone by which ransom calls were made and it was also revealed that some of the accused were neighbours of the complainant. It was while in police custody accused Nand Lal was interrogated on 10.12.2005, who suffered disclosure statement Exhibit PK as to the manner the child was kidnapped and the participation of each of the accused. Similarly, while in police custody, accused Jag Narain suffered disclosure statement Exhibit PL on 11.12.2005 that he has taken the golden chain Exhibit P1 worn by the victim on his neck and has kept concealed in the trunk in his house of which he only knew and on the basis of disclosure statement Exhibit PL got the article recovered, which was also identified by the victim and was taken into police possession through memo Exhibit PB and converted into a parcel and sealed with seal carrying impression 'MS' and regarding Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 5 which recovery rough site plan Exhibit PM was prepared.
Consequent upon completion of investigation, challan was presented against the accused and the learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 120B, 363, 364-A IPC against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In its evidence, the prosecution in all examined 18 witnesses besides the detailed above HC Sharanjit Singh PW-4, HC Sucha Singh PW-5, HC Vijay Kumar PW-6, who tendered affidavits Exhibits PW-4/A, PW-5/A, PW-6/A. The incriminating evidence of the prosecution appearing against the accused was put to each of them in their separately recorded statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., who denied the allegations claiming false implication and though did not lead any evidence in their defence but during the cross-examination of PWs documents Exhibits DA to DD have been proved.
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur through judgment and order of sentence dated 12.10.2009 held all the accused guilty for commission of offence under Sections 363, 120-B, 364-A IPC and sentenced them seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo a rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 months each under section 363 IPC; seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo a rigorous imprisonment Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 6 for a period of 3 months each under Sections 363/120-B IPC; rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of `10,000/- each under Section 364-A IPC and rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of `10,000/- each under Sections 364-A/120-B IPC and which findings have been assailed in the instant two appeals as per the grounds detailed therein and having arisen out of the common judgment are being disposed of together.
After hearing rival contentions of the counsel for the appellants Mr. Sanjeev Manhas and Mr. Pavit Mattewal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, it irrefutably ensues from the testimony of PW-1 the complainant, who also happens to be the father of the victim Raunak Rawat that the accused were known to him even prior to the occurrence as they used to reside in the same Mohalla i.e. Sunder Nagar and has empathetically stated further in his examination-in-chief that accused Jag Narain and Triveni were on visiting terms at his house and which fact has not been controverted in the cross-examination of this witness by any means. Further in his cross-examination, the witness elaborates that all the accused except Ashok Kumar were on visiting terms with him and that there was no enmity between them and were even aware of his profession and as to his earnings between `3,000/- to `4,000/- per month and who was known to him for the last 5-6 years and, therefore, thus gives an insight into the fact that the accused were acquaintances of the complainant and had inside Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 7 information about his financial capacity and being well off and obviously the greed has led them to kidnap the child of their own neighbour with a dream to become rich over night by such a sinister design. Mr. Manhas could not displace the cogent evidence that has been led on record by the prosecution as it was in the presence of PW-2 Dod Nath Rawat, the police headed by SI now DSP Mohinder Singh PW-14 and SI Harbilas Singh PW-18 had caught all the accused red handed with the child while hiding in a Chaubara at Jalandhar and PW- 2 had identified all the accused and even is signatory to this memo Exhibit PC prepared at that very place.
Counsel for the appellant could not bring to the notice of this Court anything adverse that has come in the cross-examination of this witness and rather, he further in his cross-examination elaborates that it was in his presence the police had taken into police possession the glass tumblers and finger prints of the accused and further more that the accused were known to him earlier as he also resides in the same very locality. However, he nails the identity of the accused and there is no explanation forth-coming from the side of the defence regarding this fact and which is materially corroborated by none other than the care taker of the house PW-7 Tajinder Singh @ Boby, who has elaborated how the accused had taken the Chaubara on tenancy 15 days prior to this occurrence and were apprehended in his presence from that very tenanted house in custody of the child. The mere argument of Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 8 the appellants' counsel, there is no tenancy proved on record does not discard the prosecution evidence, as it is not mandatory pre-requisite and, therefore, rebuts the submission of Mr. Manhas that the story is highly un-plausible. The testimony of PW-14 has further high-lighted how it was in his presence, the police team had conducted raid and apprehended the accused and recovered the child and has proved the documents Exhibits PC/1, PD, PE, PK, PL, PM, PB, PN, PO, PR, PP and has identified the accused as well as proved having collected the call details of the phone which is materially corroborated by another official PW-18 SI Harbilas Singh, who is another member of this police party which conducted the raid and apprehended the accused along with the child and has relied upon the documents Exhibits PC, PD, PW- 18/A, PW-18/B, PW-18/C, PW-18/D, PW-18/E, PW-18/F, PW- 18/J, PK, PK/1,PW-18/K,PB and nothing has come in his cross- examination to put to doubt his antecedents.
To further add to the case of the prosecution is the testimony of PW-10 Lal Bahadur neighbour of the complainant, who initially received ransom call on his telephone No.249699 has further lent support to the fact that the accused were from the same locality and known to this witness as well as it was only by this information they could gather his landline number and the fact that he was the neighbour of the complainant. The call details proved on the record by PW-8 Ram Parkash by way of Exhibits PF, PG shows that the witness Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 9 has categorically stated that these calls were being made by accused Triveni whom he had identified in the Court and had stated that it was from his PCO at phone No.24841453 that calls were made to phone No.249699 and these calls were made from 04.12.2005 onwards and further more PW-9 Sukhjinder Singh has proved the fact that from his PCO Nos.5562163 and 5562075 on 06.12.2005 at about 11.30 A.M. Nand Lal accused whom he had identified, had made telephonic call on No.9417478444, which is admittedly owned by the complainant and further more another PCO owner PW-13 Raghbir Singh has established that it was from his phone PCO No.5560697 on 06.12.2005 that a call was made and though he has been declared hostile but the call details proved on the record bear out and support this fact. Further PW-15 Charanjit Singh another PCO owner has detailed that it was from his phone No.5563096 on evening of 06.12.2005, accused Triveni, Jag Narian, Nand Lal had rang up on mobile No.9417478444 and demanded money and has proved document Exhibit PG in this regard. Further more, the most important testimony is of the child who was kidnapped and who has stepped into the witness box and the Court after being satisfied with the ability of the child to give evidence and recorded his deposition and he in no certain terms stated that accused Jag Narian Triveni came to him and promised to take him for merry go round and he took him to Jalandhar where he was handed over to accused Munna, Nand Lal and Jatinder and threatened the child in case Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 10 his father did not give money, he will be killed and has also identified accused Ashok Kumar and claimed that he was also given beatings by the accused and it was his locket PI carrying impression 'R' which was got recovered on the disclosure statement of accused Jag Narain and being discovery on the basis of information provided by the accused, in police custody is certainly legitimate piece of evidence in terms of Section 27 of the Evidence Act and thus cogently establishes beyond any doubt this story. PW-16 in his cross-examination as has been pointed out by learned State counsel has stated that accused Jag Narian used to visit his house as he was father of his friend and it was this accused, who has taken him from the park on his cycle though it was sought to be highlighted by the appellants' counsel that the witness states that he was taken to Bus Stand Jalandhar and there was rush and the child did not raise any hue and cry certainly does not impress this Court, as firstly the accused is known to the child and obviously the child must not have suspected what was in store for him and it could be that the child had been traumatized, which could have led to his silence and has given the history how he was initially taken to Amritsar and thereafter to Jalandhar by the accused, which is corroborated from the telephonic calls of the PCO at Amritsar. This witness has nailed all the accused to be perpetrators of this crime though PW-16 Swaran Singh before whom the accused had made extra judicial confession has sought to wriggle out of it and has been declared hostile and, however, Jyoti 2013.09.10 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-986-DB of 2009 11 the same has no impact on the prosecution story.
Thus from this evidence, proved on the record, which is not only convincing but is above impeachment and clearly establishes that it was from the custody of all the accused, this minor child was recovered and that after the kidnapping of the child by these accused, he was kept in detention and during which period, demand of ransom was raised from the father of the child and it was on account of the conspiracy hatched by each of the accused for which as per the settled position of law direct evidence is rarely forthcoming and it is from the circumstances, the Court could adduce that the accused have put together their plans and in the process had carried on each act in furtherance of this conspiracy, until finally all the accused were nabbed while keeping the child in their custody, are matters which cannot escape judicial scrutiny of the painstaking and sincere investigations undertaken by the police and thus the prosecution has completely succeeded in establishing its case against each of the accused. The learned trial Court has given a well reasoned order which is duly supported by the evidence on record and does not call for any interference. Finding no merits in both the appeals, we dismiss the same.
(HEMANT GUPTA) (FATEH DEEP SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
July 22, 2013
jt
Jyoti
2013.09.10 10:38
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh