Delhi District Court
State vs . : 1). Ramesh on 27 February, 2017
IN THE COURT OF ASJ/PILOT COURT/NORTH DISTRICT,
ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
Sessions Case No:58041/16
FIR No. : 200/11
U/s : 364A/120B/34 IPC
P.S. : KNK Marg
State Vs. : 1). Ramesh
S/o Sh.Sudhalam Uthu
R/o 94 Restohta Khatha
Vaburi, Chimanur, Distt.
Tamil Naidu
2). Vellumurgan
S/o Sh. Chellah
R/o Room No.85, Annay
Ramabai Chaal, Laxmi Nagar,
Kumberwada, Dharavi,
Mumbai-400017.
3). Manohar
S/o Sh. Thava Mani
R/o 6/123, Main Road,
Puddupatti, Alangkulam
Route, Thirunalvelli District,
Tamil Naidu.
Offence complained of : 364A/120B/34 IPC
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Acquitted
Date of committal : 16.09.2011
Date of Judgment : 27.02.2017
JUDGMENT
State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 1 ::
1. On 01.05.2011 Sh. Vijay Verma went to police station K.N.K Marg and informed that his son Rohit Verma aged 28 years 5'7" inches round face, strong built wearing jeans and Tshirt along with his employee Devender aged 38 years, wheatish complexion 5.7 inches long face, strong built wearing jeans and T shirt went to Madurai on 29.04.2011 by spice jet flight at 1;45 pm. After reaching Madurai his son and Devender talked to him and told that they are going to Coimbatore.
2. Thereafter he could not contact them. On 30.04.2011 he received call from the phone of Devender who told him that at Madurai Airport Velu met them and they have left for Coimbatore with him. He also told that they don't know where they are at that time and that they are demanding money. Thereafter, he also received call from the phone of Velu bearing No.09820121935 demanding money. On this the DD No.15A was recorded. As the police considered that this offence was committed at Madurai therefore information was sent to SSP Madurai but they refused to register FIR but assured that they will provide them the assistance.
State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 2 ::
Thereafter on the complaint of Sh. Vijay Verma FIR No.200 for the offence u/s 364A r/w 120B IPC was registered. Special teams were formed to rescue both the persons i.e. Rohit as well as Devender. They went to Madurai by AIR after taking permission. They also met SSP Madurai and requested him to provide the assistance from the local police. In the meanwhile Jasvinder Chaudhary and Prit Pal Singh relatives of victim Devender also met them. They were also joined in the raiding team. They searched the record of Hotel Ramanas Inn, On Madurai Road Thiruvnevelli and Aryaman, Thiruvnevelli. As per record on 28.04.2011 Velu Murugan along with two persons stayed in that Hotel and in Aryaman hotel Rohit Verma stayed. On 06.05.2011 Vijay Verma made a telephone call to Pritpal that Rohit has escaped from the custody of the accused persons and has reached Delhi but Devender Singh is still in their custody. Inspector Swadesh talked with Vijay Verma and Rohit Verma and tried to find out the location of the place where Devender was kept in captivity. They reached in the North of Thirunevelli and Zero down on H.No.14B Karairuppa North, State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 3 ::
Thiruvnevelli. They raided that house, rescued Devender from there and apprehended three persons Ramesh, Velu and Manohar. The other persons succeeded in fleeing from that place one bag Reebok a bag of cloth, a briefcase one chopper (khukree), one knife, two air guns were recovered which were seized police took their transit remand got them medically examined and brought them to Delhi. After completion of investigation the charge sheet was filed. Ld. MM after complying with the provisions of section 207 Cr.PC committed the case to the Sessions Court as offence punishable u/s 364 A IPC is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court. All the three accused were charged for the offences punishable u/s 120B, 364 r/w 120B IPC. Accused namely Kumar Bose and Pallia who were declared Proclaimed Offender. The trial continued only against three persons.
3. Vijay Verma was examined as PW-1. He deposed that he is running a Jewellery shop under the name and style of Bhagwati Jewellers, situated at A-4/209, Sector-
17, Rohini. On 29.04.2011 his son Rohit Verma along with Devender, his servant, went to Madurai, Tamil State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 4 ::
Naidu by plane for business purpose. After reaching there his son informed on phone that he has reached there and Velu has met him. Witness has also identified Velu. He deposed that Velu was previously known to him as Velu has come to his shop earlier to 29.04.2011. His son was carrying two mobile phones having numbers 9958943900 & 9310153702. On 30.04.2011 at about 2:00 or 2:30 pm he received telephone call from mobile phone No:9560564152 of Devender but some unknown person was talking. That person told him that Rohit Verma and Devender Singh are with them and demanded rupees One Crore for release. He threatened if demand is not fulfilled they will kill them. Mobile phone Number of Velu was 9820121935. He received another call and this time they asked for Rupees Two Crores. The calls were mostly made from the mobile phone number of Devender and few times by accused Velu. The ransom calls were received continuously from 30.04.2011 to 04.05.2011. During this period he had talked with his son who told that he has been confined by accused Manohar, Velu, Bose, Kumar and Pullia. His son asked him to pay money otherwise accused State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 5 ::
persons would kill him. The witness deposed that on 01.05.2011 he also lodged the complaint regarding this incident at PS:KNK Marg regarding that DD No.15A was recorded which is Ex.PW1/A having his signature at point X. On the same day he had also given his complaint addressed to SSP Maduri Tamil Naidu which is Ex.PW1/B on which Zero FIR was registered. His son also informed this witness that he has been confined at Thiruvnevelli near Madurai.
4. During cross examination for accused Velu and Manohar the witness deposed that he went to police station on 01.05.2011 at about 5 or 6 am to lodge the complaint. Before that he made a complaint at 100 number. PCR officials came to his house. His complaint Ex.PW1/A was recorded after 12 noon on 01.05.2011.
The written complaint Ex.PW1/2 was made in the evening. He was confronted with his statement Ex.PW1/A where there was no mention of demand of Rupees One Crore. On 30.04.2011 he received 4-5 calls from Madurai. He was having business transactions with Velu. Velu had given him advance payment of Rs.20,000/- for preparation of six boxes of playing State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 6 ::
cards. One bundle has 12 packs of playing cards. The total cost of the six boxes was about Rs.20,000/-. He stated that he is having business of Jewellery but in addition thereto he also deals in printing of playing cards. He deposed that he cannot produce any document of that business or the ledger books. He used to get playing cards printed from China. His son went to Madurai for business dealing in respect of playing cards. After 01.05.2011 he was continuously meeting the police. On 30.04.2011 he received the telephone call at about 2:00 or 2:30 pm. He did not make any complaint on 30.04.2011 till 5 am on 01.05.2011. He voluntiered that he was in Banglore on 30.04.2011 and returned on 01.05.2011 at 2:00 or 3:00 am. He did not make any call to any person or to his relative or to the relatives of Devender after receiving the ransom call. He denied the suggestion that he did not receive any ransom call. He denied the suggestion that on the asking of his son he lodged this false complaint. He also denied the suggestion that his son was hired by the gamblers at Madurai for playing cards and to win huge money with the help of special cards. He denied the suggestion that State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 7 ::
Velu was working with a travel agency and accompanied Rohit to escort him. He denied the suggestion that his son was never abducted or that his son remained for some time in Madurai before coming back to Delhi as per his own sweet will. The witness was also asked to produce the record with respect to the business of playing cards but he failed to produce any record.
5. During cross examination for accused Ramesh he stated that the police party left for Madurai on
02.05.2011 by flight. His son returned in the evening of 05.05.2011 from Madurai at about 6 or 7 pm. He used to receive the phone calls from the accused persons almost on every day after 01.05.2011. Such calls were received most of the time while he was sitting in the police station and he also made the police to hear the same on the speaker of the phone. The callers never told their names. The ransom calls continued upto 04.05.2011. Ramesh had not beaten or threatened his son Rohit or Devender. Role of Ramesh was to bring food items as told by his son Rohit. He was not doing the business of playing cards under any firm or the company. He has never reflected in his Income Tax State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 8 ::
Return about business of playing cards. He denied the suggestion that there was no such business of playing cards. He met his son for the first time after kidnapping on 05.05.2011 at about 6:00 or 7:00 pm. On 05.05.2011 he received phone call from his son at about 4:00 or 5:00 am who told that he had dozed the kidnappers and ran away from hiding. His son made a call from the phone of a public person. He again received the call from his son at about 10:00 am on 05.05.2011 and thereafter 2-4 more calls. His son asked him to book Air ticket for Delhi. He does not remember from whom he got the ticket booked. He denied the suggestion that he did not get any such ticket booked. This witness and his son met I.O Sh. Swadesh Prakash on 05.05.2011 at about 7:00 pm. IO Swadesh Prakash recorded statement of his son at his office.
6. Rohit Verma was examined as PW-2. He deposed that he is in the business of Jewellery shop and printing of playing cards. This witness became acquainted with accused Velu and Pullia one month prior to the incident when they visited Delhi. Accused Velu and Pullia had given them samples of playing cards and asked them to State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 9 ::
get the same printed. This witness got the playing cards printed. Thereafter on 28.04.2011 he received telephonic call from accused Velu asking him to come to Thirunevelli, Tamil Naidu. On 30.04.2011 Velu got the tickets booked for 29.04.2011 and also gave the PNR numbers through SMS. The tickets were of Spice Jet airways. He along with Devender (helper) took the flight at 1 pm and reached Madurai Airport at 6:30 pm. Accused Velu met them at the Airport. Velu escorted them to the Thirunvelli, Tamil Naidu in Indica Taxi. They stayed there in a Hotel Araman. There pullia and Bose met them. This witness along with Devender were lodged in the hotel opposite Araman i.e. Ramas. On 30.04.2011 Vellu came to them. Pullia and Bose were waiting for them outside. They hired one auto. This witness, Devender and Vellu sat in the auto Pullia and Bose accompanied them on motorcycle. They took them to the house of person having one eye. There were other 5-6 persons. They were asked to wait in one room.
After 5-6 minutes accused Vellu, Pullia, Bose and Kumar along with 4-5 accomplices came armed with guns and asked this witness and Devender to remove State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 10 ::
the clothes. Accused Ramesh and Manohar were also among those persons. Those persons also took away his two gold rings, two mobiles make N-8 Nokia and Samsung Corby, ATM card of ICICI Bank and his wrist watch. Those persons also asked him to make a call to his father asking him to arrange Rupees Two crores and that if demand is not fulfilled they will kill him. The accused persons thereafter continued intimidating them. Thereafter Kumar and his 5-6 mens remained in the house and accused Vellu, Bose, Pullia and Manohar left. Before leaving accused Vellu, Bose, Pullia and Manohar made this witness to talk to his father on mobile phone belonging to Devender. He told his father on telephone that they had been kept in captivity by them and they are demanding rupees two crores failing which they will kill them and asked his father to arrange for rupees Two crores and get them released. Next morning again accused Vellu, Manohar, Bose and Pullia came there at about 10 or 11 am. They again made this witness to talk to his father on the mobile phone of Devender and ask him whether the arrangement has been done. This routine continued till 4th May 2011. in State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 11 ::
the intervening night of 4/5th May 2011 at about 2:30 or 3:00 am on the pretext of urinating he was allowed to go out of the room to the bathroom located outside the room. He fled away after Jumping over the boundary wall. He boarded the bus to Madurai after reaching the road and from Madurai he went to the Airport on foot and called his father on the telephone. From Madurai Airport after arranging the ticket he came to Delhi on the same day. He also identified his suit case the bag and also the weapon. When he reached Delhi, Delhi police officials met him.
7. During cross-examination he stated that he carried with him the playing cards from Delhi to Mumbai.
On 30.04.2011 he went to house of Kumar along with Pullia, Bose and Vellu. His statement was recorded on return to Delhi. He told the police that Vellu and Pullia had come to meet him on earlier occasion also and that he had gone to Madurai along with Devender only to deliver cards but was confronted with his statement where it was not found recorded. On 30.04.2011 he talked with his father on the phone of Devender at about 12:00 noon and for the second time he talked with father State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 12 ::
at about 5 pm. The persons at that place were having two long guns, one small gun, one knife and two small knives. The accused persons did not cause any injury either to this witness or to Devender. No one accompanied him for going to the bathroom from where he escaped. Devender was sleeping at that time. According to this witness nobody came to know about his escape immediately. There was also no noise regarding that. He was confronted with his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC where the name of the accused Ramesh is not mentioned. The witness failed to identify accused Ramesh in the Judicial TIP.
8. During cross-examination for accused Vellu and Manohar he stated that his father arranged the air ticket from Madurai to Delhi. He does not remember by which mode he received Air ticket from Madurai to Delhi. His father did not make him a call as he was not carrying his phone. He does not remember as to how his father informed him about the arrangement of the air-ticket. He admitted that his father did not meet him at Madurai Airport. He also did not hand over his air-tickets from Madurai to Delhi to the police. He had not handed over State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 13 ::
any document to the police to show that the said ticket was booked from Delhi by his father. He reached Madurai Airport in between 7:30 to 8:00 am and remained in the airport till he boarded the flight. He did not tell anybody including the police staff, airport officials, security officials about the incident on the airport. He also did not tell about the occurrence to any passenger or the flight staff. He stated that he was carrying Rs.500/- with him and out of that he paid fare of the bus upto Madurai Airport. In the same evening when he returned to Delhi he along with his father went to the police station and met the IO. He denied the suggestion that neither he nor Devender Singh was ever kidnapped or that he hired the room in the hotel and thereafter the dispute arouse. He left for Delhi leaving Devender at Madurai. He denied the suggestion that he had gone to the Madurai only for the purpose of participating in the big gamble, but there the gamblers refused to play with him as one of them was already aware about his cheating tactics. He denied the suggestion that the tickets from Delhi to Madurai and Madurai to Delhi were already delivered to him. He denied the suggestion that State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 14 ::
he was never kidnapped.
9. HC Surender Pal was examined as PW-3. On 04.05.2011 he was working as duty officer and he proved the copy of FIR as Ex.PW3/A, endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW3/B.
10. HC Raj Kumar was examined as PW-4. On 01.05.2011 he was working as duty officer and he proved the DD No.15 as Ex.PW1/A.
11. Sh. Devender was examined as PW-5. He deposed that at that time he was employed with Sh.
Vijay Verma. Two-three months prior to the present incident, accused Valu (accordingly identified) came to Delhi and met Vijay Verma. Valu gave Rs. 10,000/- to Vijay Verma but he does not know for what purpose. On 28.04.2011, he alongwith Rohit Verma, S/o Sh. Vijay Verma reached at Madurai by Spice Air Lines. They reached Madurai on 29.04.2017. Valu met them and they proceeded to Thirunevelli. In the hotel accused Manohar and Pulia met them who were introduced by the accused Valu. Accused Valu, Manohar stayed at hotel Raman's. This witness alongwith Rohit Verma stayed at hotel Aryas. Thereafter all the accused left. On State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 15 ::
30.04.2011 at around 11.30 AM-12.00 Noon accused Valu, Manohar and Pulia came. He alongwith Rohit Verma and Valu proceeded in a TCR. Accused Manohar and Pulia followed them on motorcycle. They were taken in house where 6-7 persons were already present.
He and Rohit were confined in a room of with house. The accused persons stated them that they have been kidnapped. The accused asked RohitVerma to make a call to his father and ask him to bring Rs. 2 crore. Accused person snatched mobile phone and gold chain of Rohit Verma alongwith purse having ATM Cards and cash. Accused asked Rohit Verma to make a call using mobile phone number 9560564152 belonging to this witness but he refused. Thereafter all the accused persons threatened this witness with knife and gun. He made a call to Vijay Verma. He informed him that they had been kidnapped and accused persons are demanding Rs. 2 crores for their release. Sh. Vijay Verma told that he is at Bangalore presently and will make arrangement after reaching Delhi. Accused persons threatened them that if Rs. 2 crore is not paid within two day they will kill them. He came to know the State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 16 ::
name of all the accused persons during their discussion as Mr. Boss, Ramesh and Murugan. There were other six persons whom he does not know. He identified the accused Ramesh and Manohar present in the court. On 01.05.2011, he again made a call at about 11.AM for asking Rs. 2 crore but Sh. Vijay Verma told him that he is unable to arrange Rs. 2 crore due to shortage of time and aksed for 2-3 days time. From 01.05.2011 to 05.05/2011 accused persons continued to threaten them and he used to make a call to Vijay Verma. On 5th, May 2011 at about 4.30-5 PM all three accused present in the court asked their associate to kill as they have no hope to receive the money. They requested accused persons not to kill and assured to make the payment.
Accused persons gave them one day time. On the night of 5th-6th, May, 2011 at about 2.30 AM Rohit Verma ran away from the custody of the accused persons. Again said Rohit Verma escaped in the night of 4th-5th, May, 2011 at about 3.30-4 AM.
12. Insp. Ved Prakash alongwith his team reached there and rescued him for the custody of accused persons. He also identified the case property. State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 17 ::
13. During cross examination he deposed that he had no knowledge if Vijay Verma was doing any other business also. He had not seen the accused Valu, Manohar and Ramesh before 29th, April, 2011. At Madurai, neither he nor Rohit had given or received any parcel or any article from the accused Valu or from any other accused persons at Madurai. None of the accused stayed with them at hotel Ramans at Thirunevelli. They stayed at hotel Aryman only for one day. Next day Valu told them "Chalo Kaam Hai" and they left in auto rickshaw and were taken to the house, where they were confined. Rohit ran way by climbing the boundary wall near toilet. Rohit Verma did not enter the toilet and escaped. Some of the accused chased him but Rohit escaped. The toilet/washroom was inside the premises and accused persons used to accompay him when ever he used the toilet. He was kept at the same place for two days. Even after Rohit escaped by scaling the wall. He was asleep at the time when Rohit Verma escaped and hence does not know as to at what time he escaped. On the intervening night of 6th-7th, May, 2011 at about 2.30 AM or 3.00 AM police reached there and State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 18 ::
saved him. He was confronted with his statement where it was not found mention that accused Manohar and Pulia met him at hotel. On 7th, May, 2011 after about 3.30 PM they went to local hotel at Madurai and remained there till next morning and at about 8.00 AM they started from hotel and reached the place of captivity at about 10.00 AM. They remained there till 12.30 PM or 1.00 PM. Thereafter they went to local police station. They remained there till 5.0 PM.
14. He denied the suggestion that he is gambler or gone to Madurai for gambling. He denied the suggestion that he and Rohit were never kidnapped. He denied the suggestion that he made calls to Vijay Verma that front on the asking off Rohit Verma only.
15. Sh. Vishal Gaurav, Nodal Officer Bharti Airtel Ltd. was examined as PW-6. He proved the record of phone No. 9560564152 issued in the name of Harinder, S/o Sh. Harvansh Singh. The certified copy of customer application form is proved as Ex. PW-6/A. The copy of feed back form is Ex. Ex. PW-6/B. The copy of Voter I.D. Card is Ex. PW-6/C. The call detail record of this mobile phone for the period of 29th April, 2011 to 7th April, State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 19 ::
2011 is proved as Ex. PW-6/D. He also deposed that as per the call detail record this mobile phone was in roaming from 29th, April, 2011 at 21-32-07 to 4th, May, 2011 in Tamil Nadu circle.
16. He also proved the record of phone number 9958943900. It was issued in the name of Rohit Verma, S/o sh. Vijay Verma. The certified copy of customer application form is Ex. PW-6/E. The photocopy of driving license of Rohit Verma is Ex. PW-6/F. The call detail record for the period of 29th, April, 2011 to 7th, May, 2011 is Ex. PW-6/G. The said mobile phone was in roaming from 29th, April, 2011 at 22-04-2011 to 30th April, 2011 in Tamil Nadu circle.
17. Mobile number 9717159600 was issued in the name of Vijay Verma S/o Rajan Verma. The certified copy of customer application form is proved as Ex. PW- 6/H. The photocopy of driving license is Ex. PW-6/J. The call detail record from 29th, April, 2011 to 7th, May, 2011 is Ex. Ex. PW-6/K.
18. Mobile phone No. 8826930336 was issued in the name of Prince Pal Singh. The certified copy of customer application form is Ex. PW-6/L/ the photocopy State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 20 ::
of driving license is Ex. PW-6/M. The call detail record of this phone from 29th, April, 2011 o 7th May, 2011 is Ex. PW-6/N. The mobile phone was in roaming from 03.05.2011 to 07.05.2011 in Tamil Nadu.
19. Phone number 8826088600 is in the name of Prince Pal Singh. The certified copy of customer application form is Ex. PW-6/O. The photocopy of PAN Card and rent agreement is Ex. PW-6/P and Ex. PW- 6/Q. The call detail record for the period of 29th, April, 2011 to 7th, May, 2011 of this number is Ex. PW-6/R. He also proved the certificate U/s 65-B Evidence Act is Ex. PW-6/S. The testimony of this witness had gone unchallenged.
20. HC Balwan Singh was examined as PW-7. He deposed that on 5th, May, 2011 he alongwith ACP A.K. Lal, Insp. Pooran Panth, Insp. Swadesh Prakash, SI Shri Bhagwan proceeded for Madurai from Delhi by Air. They reached Madurai at about 6.30 PM. SI Jasminder, Chandra Hari, Preet Pal Singh brother-in-law of victim Devender reached office of SSP, Madurai and then proceeded to Thirunevelli in official vehicle of SSP office. They reached police station Thachinallur, State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 21 ::
Thirunevelli. Local police was also joined. ACP A.K. Lal formed different teams. This witness was in the team of Insp. Swadesh Prakash, SI Shri Bhagwan, Preet Pal Singh. They checked the hotels and lodges and in hottel Raman's Inn for room no. 206 entry in the name of Valu Murugan was found. Insp. Swadesh Kumar collected the photocopy of register and photocopy of ID proof. The same were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-7/A, attested copy of ID proof i.e. PAN Card is Ex. Pw-7/B. The attested copy of register is Ex. Pw-7/C.
21. Thereafter, they reached hotel Aryaman where entry in the name of Rohit Verma in room No. 61 on 29.04.2011 was found. The photocopy of said entry was seized vide seizure memo PW-7/D, the photocopy of ID card was Ex. PW-7/E and the photocopy of register is Ex. Pw-7/F . In the mean while Prince Pal Singh received a call of Vijay Verma who told that his son Rohit escaped from the clutches of kidnappers and reached Delhi but Devender is still in the custody of kidnappers. Insp. Swadesh Prakash also talked on telephone with Rohit Verms and inquired about location off kidnappers and victim. Thereafter they alongwith State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 22 ::
local police reached at Karairuppu North, Thirunevelli. They notice some suspicious activities in the house number 14/B. They raided the said house. 5-6 persons tried to escaped but they apprehended accused Valu, Ramesh and Manohar. They entered the house and found Devender. Accused Valu was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW-5/A and his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW-6/D. Accused Manohar was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW-5/B and his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW-6/E. Accused Ramesh was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW-5/C and his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW-6/F. The accused persons were interrogated. Accused Valu, Manohar and Ramesh made the disclosure statement vide Ex. PW-7/G, Ex. PW-7/H and Ex. PW-7/J.
22. From that room one bag belonging to victim Devender, one bag and suit case belonging to Rohit Verma were found which were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-7/A. The bag belonging to victim Devender was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-5/H State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 23 ::
and the suit case of victim Rohit Verma was seized vide seizure memo Ex. Pw5/J. Two air guns out of which one was found broken, one chopper, one kukhri and knife were recovered from the said room. IO prepared site plan and thereafter they returned to the local police station and from there to Delhi. During investigation at Madurai they have also seized the photocopy of documents of Jai Laxmi residence lodge vide memo Ex. PW-7/L and the documents are Ex. PW-7/M. The documents of GKS were also seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-7/N and the documents are Ex. PW-7/O. The accused persons were produce in court at Delhi. On 18.05.2011 the accused persons made subsequent disclosure statement. The disclosure statement of Ramesh is Ex. PW-7/O and disclosure statement of accused Vellu is PW-7/Q. The witness identified the accused persons as well as the case property.
23. During cross examination he deposed that the reservation of room Aryaman and Ramanas hotels were made by the accused Valu as told by the managers of the said hotels. it took them 7-8 hours to find out the place of captivity. IO did not record the information State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 24 ::
received by him on phone regarding escaped of Rohit. He does not know if any information was given either by Rohit Verma or his father at Delhi to any police official about escape of Rohit Verma and the place where kidnapers have detained Devender. No weapon was used by any person when they entered the premises where the Devender was detained. they entered the house after climbing the boundary wall. There was a jungle on the back side of the house. Vicim Devender was found in the middle room and was sitting on the ground. There was no bedding, chair and furniture in the room. Weapons were lying in the room about 10-15 feet from Devender. There was enough light in the room. No weapon was recovered from the possession of the accused who were apprehended. They remained in the said house for about 5-6 hours and left the same at about 4.30 AM. First of all Insp. Swadesh entered the said room. Victim Devender was found sitting in the room wearing clothes. He denied the suggestion that the accused Vellu was not arrested in the manner as deposed by him.
24. Insp. Yash was examined as PW-8. He deposed State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 25 ::
that on 01.05.2011 Vijay Verma came to the police station with complaint Ex. PW-1/B received by Duty Officer vide DD No. 69/B at 10.00 PM. He perused the complaint. Prima facie an offence U/s 364/120-B IPC was made out. Prima facie the place of occurrence fall in the jurisdiction of P.S:Madurai. He made endorsement Ex. PW-8/A and requested duty officer to register Zero FIR. as per the direction of DCP the investigation was entrusted to Insp. Sudesh. No material came out during the cross examination of this witness.
25. SI Bharat lal Hans was examined as PW-9. He was working as duty officer and proved the copy of FIR Ex. PW-9/A, his endorsement on rukka is Ex. Pw-9/B.
26. SI Sri Bhagwan was examined as PW-10. He corroborated the testimony of PW-7 about rescue of the victim and arrest of all the accused person. He also identified the accused persons and the case property.
27. They remained at Hotel Ramanas for about 4-5 minutes. They reached there at about 4.45 PM. The documents were handed over by the person who was sitting at reception. Preet Pal Singh received the telephone call at about 6.00 PM on 6 th May, 2011. He State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 26 ::
does not know what was discussed between Rohit and Insp. Sudesh. He denied the suggestion that the accused Vellu was not apprehended at H. No. 14/B or that accused Vellu was apprehended by Madurai police from Jai Laxmi lodge at about 3.00 AM and was handed over to Delhi police at 11.00 AM. They remained at the spot from 8.00 PM to 2.30 AM. He denied the suggestion that no weapon was recovered from there. On 6th, May, 2011 in the morning hours at about 9-9.30 AM they gathered in AATS Chowki Rohini. They remained there for about half an hour. From there they reached Airport at 12.00 Noon for Madurai and reached at 6.30 PM.
28. Inspector Swadesh informed them that victim Rohit escaped and reached Delhi. Insp. Swadesh talked to Rohit who informed the place from were he escaped.
They reached at place at about 8.30 PM. He denied that the accused Ramesh was apprehended from Vrinalpetai over bridge. He denied the suggestion that two moblie phones were recovered from the possession of accused Ramesh with Rs. 1600/-. He stated that he and Insp. Swadesh were in uniform. They kept watch house for State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 27 ::
about one and half to two hours. He apprehended persons after entering from the back side in the gallery. Victim was found in the room at about 10.00-10.30 PM.
29. Sh. G. Sarkar Narayanan was examined as PW-11 through translator Sh. Sarvanand. He proved the record of GKS lodge as Ex. PW-7/O. According to the record on 01.05.2011 at about 11.00 AM a person named Pandaiyan lodged in their hotel and was given room No.302.
30. Sh. V. Keshvan was examined as PW-12 he proved the record of Jaya Laxmi lodge and the record is Ex. PW-7/L and PW-7/M. Manohar stayed in the lodge in the night hours and next day he came to know about this fact.
31. Sh. Shivanand Manager of hotel Aryman and Hotel, Ramanas Inn was examined as PW-13. He proved the record of both the hotels. He gave the record regarding stay of Rohit Verma from 29.04.2011 to
30.04.2011 and the record is proved as Ex.PW7/D, E and F. He also proved the record regarding stay of C-Vellu Murgan in hotel Ramanas Inn and the record is proved as Ex.PW7/A, B, & C. He identified Ramesh as State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 28 ::
C-Velu Murugan but during cross-examination by Ld. APP he correctly idnetified C-Velu Murugan.
32. Sh. Yogesh Tripathi Nodal Officer from Reliance communication was examined as PW-14. He proved the record of mobile phone No.9310153702. This mobile phone is registered in the name of Nirmal verma wife of Sh. Vijay Verma. The scanned copy of the customer application form is proved as Ex.PW14/A. The photocopy of the voter ID card is Ex.PW14/B. The call detail record from 25.4.2011 to 30.04.2011 is proved as Ex.PW14/C. The certificate u/s 65B Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW14/D.
33. Israr Babu alternate Nodal officer was examined as PW-15. He proved the record with respect to mobile phone No. 9953520047 in the name of Prince Pal Singh son of SH. Kirpal Singh. The photocopy of the customer application form is Ex.PW15/A. The photocopy of the driving license is proved as Ex.PW15/B. The call detail record for the period 29.04.2011 to 07.05.2011 running into 9 pages is proved as Ex.PW15/C. The certificate u/s 65 B Evidence Act is Ex.PW15/D. He also proved the record pertaining to mobile No.9820121935. It is in the State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 29 ::
name of C. Vellu Murgan son Sh. V. Chellian. The photocopy of customer application form is proved as Ex.PW15/E. The photocopy of the driving license is Ex.PW15/F. The call detail record of the said mobile number from 29.04.2011 to 07.05.2011 is Ex.PW15/G. The certificate u/s 65B Evidence Act is proved as Ex.PW15/H.
34. Sh. Shishir Malhotra, Nodal officer was examined as PW-16. But he could not bring the record.
35. Inspector Sanjeev Kumar was examined as PW-17. He deposed that on 04.05.2011 he was posted as SHO PS: KNK Marg. On that day he received the fax message Ex.PW17/A from DCP office Outer District. On the same he made his endorsement Ex.PW17/B and got the zero FIR. Zero FIR was already registered on the complaint of complainant which is Ex.PW1/B. The investigation of case was assigned to Incharge AATS Outer District after registration of case FIR No.200/11 as per the directions.
36. Inspector Swadesh Prakash was examined as PW-18. He is the IO of the case and he fully corroborated the testimony of the other witnesses that is State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 30 ::
Ex.PW-7 as well as Ex.PW-9. He also deposed that on 17.05.2011 the three accused persons were produced before Ld. MM Delhi. He took the police custody remand. He collected the copies of the arrival register of Hotel Elegant and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW18/C. He proved the photocopy of the ID proof same is Ex.PW18/D. He seized the copy of the page Ex.PW18/C, Photo ID Card as Ex.PW18/D and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW18/E. He moved application for TIP which was got conducted. He also proved thelist of passengers from Spice Jet Ex.PW18/F. The disclosure statement of Vellu recorded on 07.05.2011 Ex.PW18/G. He also correctly identified all the accused persons and the case property.
37. During cross-examination he stated that he did not collect any document regarding order placed by accused Vellu, after making advance payment of Rs.10,000/-. He made inquiries from the complainant about the receipt of Rs.10,000/- but he denied having issued any such receipt. He did not make any inquiry as to how many bundles of playing cards were ordered to be printed by accused Vellu. He also did not inquire if State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 31 ::
infact the complainant was in printing business. No playing cards were found at the place of recovery or at the hotels where the raids were conducted. He did not investigate as to whether playing cards were delivered by the complainant to the accused or not. He did not interrogate the accused persons on this account. The room in which the victim was found was found bolted from outside when they reached there. The hands and legs of victim were found tied. He tried to contact the neighbours but none came forward. He did not collect any document as to how Rohit Verma reached Delhi from Madurai. He admitted that Vijay Verma earlier made a missing report with respect to Rohit Verma. He does not remember if ransom call was received by Vijay Verma before making the missing report. He did not put the phone of complainant Vijay Verma on surveillance. They were at Thirunevali Distt. Madurai when Prit Pal Singh received the call of Vijay Verma. He does not remember if he seized the material which was used for tying the victim. He denied the suggestion that accused persons have been falsely implicated or that fair investigation was not carried out.
State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 32 ::
38. Thereafter prosecution evidence was closed.
Statement of accused persons were recorded. Accused Vellu and accused Ramesh wished to lead evidence in defence. Thereafter the case was fixed for defence evidence.
39. Ramesh examined Arumugham as DW-1. He deposed that he knew Ramesh since child hood. On 04.05.2011 this witness and Ramesh and their other friends and family members visited Madurai on the function of daughter of Ramesh's sister attaining majority on 05.05.2011. On 06.05.2011 they returned back to their village and thereafter this witness and Ramesh went to Varnarpatti outer road bridge in a garage for service of the car. He was driving car Omni and Ramesh was having Qualis bearing No.TN 72AA 3007. At about 5 or 5:30 pm on 06.05.2011 after dropping their cars for service they came outside the garage. He was talking on phone and Ramesh was moving ahead of him. Police came in police van and made inquiries from Ramesh and they took him away.
40. During cross-examination he stated that he does not remember the mobile number of accused Ramesh. State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 33 ::
He admitted that Ramesh was using mobile phone in the month of 2011. Ramesh never visited Delhi. He was driver on Omni Van No.TN 72AE 1441 owned by Muttu. He denied the suggestion that he along with Ramesh was working as a driver with Yogi Travels. He had not given any complaint to any police officer in Tamil Naidu or in Delhi.
41. Babu was examined as DW-2. He also deposed on the lines of DW-1 about the function and proved the CD's etc. of the function.
42. During cross-examination he stated that Sh. Sudhalamuthu is father of accused Ramesh. He does not remember the mobile phone number of the accused. He admitted that arrest memo Ex.PW5/C bears signature of father of accused. He denied the suggestion that accused was not arrested from the place and the time as deposed or that he is deposing falsely.
43. Muthupandi was examined as DW-3. He proved the original recording of the DVDR as Ex.DW3/A and the certificate u/s 65B as Ex.DW3/B.
44. During cross-examination he stated that he has State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 34 ::
no bill or any other document to prove that he was hired for doing videography of the function. He denied that he has not carried out any videography or that it has been manipulated. Thereafter, defence evidence was closed. The case was fixed for final arguments.
45. I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for the State, Ld. Defence counsel for the accused persons and perused the record.
46. Ld. APP submitted that in order to prove its case prosecution has examined Eighteen witnesses. It is a case of kidnapping for ransom. Prosecution has examined the victims Rohit Verma and Devender as PW-2 and PW-5. Ld. APP submitted that it has been proved on record that accused persons along with their co-accused namely Kumar @ Comboya Bose @ Muttu Rama Lingam and Pallia who are the proclaimed offender had hatched a criminal conspiracy and in pursuance to that conspiracy accused Vellu along with Pallia came to Delhi. He met PW-1 Vijay Verma father of Rohit Verma and placed the order for the playing cards and also gave Rs.20,000/- as the value of those playing cards. For supply of those playing cards Rohit Verma State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 35 ::
along with employee Devender Singh went to Madurai by AIR. The tickets were also provided by the accused as has come in the testimony of PW-2. The accused persons made them stay in Hotel Arayman as has come in the testimony of PW-13 and also deposed by PW-2 and PW-5. The accused persons themselves were staying at Ramans. The copies of the registers have been proved on record. The bill of Rohit Verma is proved as Ex.PW7/F and that of Vellu staying at Ramanas is Ex.PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B. Ld. APP submitted that from there the accused persons took them to the house of Kumar situated in North Thirunevelli i.e. H.No.14B, Karairuppa North Thirunevelli, Madurai. They were confined there. Their clothes were also removed as has come in the testimony of PW-2. All their belonging were taken including the mobile phones and they were threatened to make a call to PW-1. On repeated threats and after putting the knife on the head of Devender Singh, Devender Singh made a call from his mobile phone to PW-1 on 30.04.2011. at about 2:00 or 2;30 pm telling that they have been kidnapped by vellu and the other State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 36 ::
accused persons and that they are demanding rupees two crores for their release. It was also conveyed that if money is not paid they would kill them. PW-1 was at Banglore at that time as has come in his testimony. He returned to Delhi on 01.05.2011 and immediately after reaching there he made the complaint regarding missing of his son. In this regard DD No.15A Ex.PW4/A was recorded. Later on he also gave written complaint Ex.PW1/B on the basis of which initially zero FIR was registered but as the SSP Maduri refused to take any action, the FIR was registered at Delhi and the teams were formed for rescue of the victims from Madurai. The police reached Maduri but in the meanwhile Rohit Verma escaped from the confinement of the accused persons on the pretext of urinating on the intervening night of 4/5 May 2011 and reached Delhi by catching a flight. He talked with Inspector Swadesh Kumar and told him the place where he was confined and thereafter that place i.e. H.No.14B Kariaruppa was raided by the police team. Prosecution has examined HC Balwan Singh PW- 7, SI Sri Bhagwan PW-10 and PW-18 Inspector Swadesh Praskash in this regard. They all three State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 37 ::
deposed that they resecued Devender Singh who was confined in a room and they also apprehend 3 persons from that house. Other accused persons succeeded in fleeing from the spot. The three accused persons arrested were Ramesh.S, Vellu and Manohar. Ld. APP submitted that from the testimony of PW-2 and PW-5 corroborated by PW-1 it is clear that the accused persons along with their co-accused who are proclaimed offender kidnapped Rohit Verma PW-2 and Devender Singh PW-5, kept them in captivity, demanded rupees two crores by extending threat of killing if demand is not met and ultimately, Devender Singh was got released from the custody of accused persons and Rohit Verma succeeded in fleeing. All the ingredients of the offence are proved and established. The onus which was on the prosecution has been fully discharged. It is prayed that all the accused persons be held guilty and convicted.
47. Ld. Defence counsel submitted that the onus which was on the prosecution has not been discharged. Prosecution has miserably failed to prove and establish that Rohit Verma PW-2 and Devender Singh PW-5 were kidnapped for ransom or that there were any such State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 38 ::
demand for ransom. Ld. Counsel submitted that in fact Rohit Verma was a gambler. He had gone there on invitation of some parties to participate in a big gamble. He had to get huge amount for that but the persons present there were already knowing about him and they refused to play with him. Thereafter, Rohit Verma in connivance with Devender Singh and his father concocted the story of kidnapping for ransom to extract money from accused persons. Ld. Counsel submitted that they have been falsely implicated. Even otherwise the story of prosecution is not believable.
48. According to PW-1 he received the information about kidnapping at about 2:00 or 2:30 pm on 30.04.2011 but the FIR was got registered only on 04/05 May 2011 that also in the afternoon. Record also shows that PW-1 was regularly talking with his son and Devender which again shows that it is a concocted story and record have been manipulated. According to the evidence of PW-2 as well as PW-5 when they were confined in the room the accused persons removed their all clothes and had also taken their belongings i.e. ring of Rohit Verma his mobile phone etc. But there is no State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 39 ::
recovery of any of these articles from the possession of accused or from the place where they were confined. Ld. Counsel further submitted that according to the story Rohit Verma and Devender Singh had gone there to deliver playing cards as according to Vijay Verma, he was also printing playing cards. However, no such record has been produced though opportunity was given to witness to bring such record and produce in the court which also falsifies the story of prosecution. Ld. Counsel further submitted that PW-2 and PW-5 had gone there to deliver playing cards. Though the belongings of PW-2 and PW-5 have been recovered from that room but those playing cards have not been recovered and there is also no such statement that PW-2 and PW-6 have delivered those playing cards or those playing cards were taken away by the accused persons, which create doubt about the truthfulness of story of prosecution. Ld. Counsel further submitted that according to PW-2 he ran away from the captivity on the night intervening on 04th / 05th May 2011 on the pretext of urinating. Ld. Counsel submitted that it is highly unbelievable that the victim could flee at 2:30 or 3:00 am particularly when he was State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 40 ::
not having clothes on his body as deposed by PW-2 and PW-5 themselves. Secondly, he was not having money then how he reached the airport, from airport he boarded the flight. It is alleged that the ticket was got arranged by his father but no such record has been produced i.e. boarding pass has not been produced. PW-2 was not having his mobile also with him. Then how PW-1 told him about the ticket or its PNR number. Ld. Counsel submitted that he even after reaching did not inform the police or the security staff after reaching the airport. He was not even having any ID proof then how he got entry in the airport. Ld. Counsel submitted that it is a concocted story otherwise all these documents should have been placed on record. Ld. Counsel further submitted that prosecution also alleged that Devender was recovered from the same place on 06.05.2011 at night around 11:00 pm. Ld. Counsel submitted that it is highly unbelievable that accused persons remained at the same place to be caught by the police even after one of the person had already escaped and even thereafter will keep the other kidnapped person at the same place. Ld. Counsel State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 41 ::
submitted that according to PW-5 he was rescued at about 3:30 or 3:00 am when the police reached there but according to PW-10 they rescued him at about 8 pm and left at about 2:30 am whereas according to PW-7 they left that place in the morning at about 4:30 am and they remained there for about 5 to 6 hours.
49. Ld. Counsel further submitted that according to PW-1 his son reached Delhi on 05.05.2011 and thereafter he along with his son met Inspector Swadesh Prakash in his office in the evening between 5 to 7 pm and apprised him about the fact that his son has escaped from the captivity and Swadesh Prakash also discussed with him. But when Inspector Swadesh Prakash appeared in the witness box he did not support the testimony of PW-1. He stated that on 05.05.2011 at about 6:30 pm they already reached Madurai Airport and according to PW-10 the other member of the raiding team on 06.05.2011 in the morning at about 9:00 or 9:30 am they gathered at AATS chowki Rohini. They remained there for about half an hour. They reached the Airport at 12:00 noon and reached Madurai at 6:30 pm. From this it is clear that they were not in that raiding State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 42 ::
team as alleged. Ld. Counsel further submitted that according to them it was Prince Pal Singh who received phone call from Vijay Verma and it was only on telephone that Vijay Verma informed that Rohit had escaped and reached Delhi. Swadesh Prakash talked with Rohit on telephone and also with PW-1. Ld. Counsel further submitted that they are also inconsistent as to from where Devender Singh was recovered, whether he was wearing clothes or not. The important witness Pritpal Singh who was there with the police at the time of recovery had not been examined. No public person from the locality joined. Ld. Counsel submitted that all these facts and the contradictions in the testimony of witnesses mention the story of the prosecution is highly unbelievable and improbable. It is prayed that benefit of the same be given to accused persons and they be acquitted.
50. After hearing the arguments and going through the record I found that in this case according to PW-1 accused Velu came to him and placed order for 6 bundles of playing cards. According to story PW-2 and Devender Singh PW-5 had gone to deliver those State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 43 ::
bundles of playing cards and on the Airport itself accused Velu met them and took them to the hotel. None of the witness i.e. PW-2 and PW-5 stated that they have handed over those bundles of playing cards to Velu or to any other person. The belongings of PW-2 and PW-5 were recovered on 06.05.2011 from the place of captivity. According to the police those bundles were not found. PW-1 was also asked during cross- examination to produce any document to show that he is also dealing in playing cards, but he failed to place on record any such document in this regard. This fact itself creates doubt about the story.
51. According to PW-2 and PW-5 they were taken to some place in Thiruvnella where they were kept confined and forced to make call of ransom to PW-1.
52. PW-1 deposed that initially he received call from mobile phone of Devender and some other person was speaking who is demanded Rs.1 Crore and threatened that if amount is not paid then his son and Devender would be killed. Lateron he received the call and this time caller demanded Rs.2 Crores. But when PW-2 and PW-5 examined they stated that the demand from the State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 44 ::
beginning was only Rs.2 Crores. PW-5 also stated that it was he who talked with PW-1 on mobile phone and not the accused persons.
53. It is also important to note that according to PW-2 and PW-5 the accused persons removed their clothes and had taken the belongings of PW-2 and PW-5 but surprisingly PW-2 flee from the captivity on the night of 4/5 May 2011. he also boarded a bus and then took a flight and reached Delhi. There is a misery as to from where money came to him as all his belonging were already taken by accused persons. He alleged that he was having Rs.500/- with him. But if his clothes and belonging were taken as deposed by PW-2 himself then there is no possibility that he was having Rs.500/- with him. But still if it is presumed he was having Rs.500/-
still without clothes, it was not possible for him to firstly reach the Airport and then catch the flight and reach Delhi. Story as put by prosecution is that the ticket was arranged from the Delhi but no such record has been placed on file. Even otherwise at that time PW-2 was not having any mobile phone with him. Then how it was communicated to him. PW-2 was also not having any ID State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 45 ::
proof with him. Then how he managed to enter the Airport. It is also important to note that according to PW- 1 he along with his son met Inspector Swadesh Prakash PW-18 on the evening of 05.5.2011, who also inquired from him about the place where he and Devender Singh were kept confined. But according to the police witnesses PW-7, PW-10 and PW-18 they were already in Madurai when Prince Pal Singh, who was with them, received telephone call of PW-1 who informed that Rohit verma had escaped from the captivity of the accused but Devender is still there. It is also very important to note that according to PW-7 and PW-18 they left Delhi on 05.05.2011 and at 6:30 /7:00 pm they were in Madurai. But according to PW-10 they left Delhi on 06.05.2011 at about 12:00 noon. It is also very surprising and something unbelievable that the accused persons continued to stay along with the person who was kidnapped at the same place for about 48 hours only to be caught by the police when one of the victim had already escaped about 48 hours back. There is also contradiction about the time when PW-5 was rescued.
According to PW-5 he was rescued in the morning State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 46 ::
around 3:30/4:00 am. Whereas according to PW-7 and PW-10 he was rescued between 10:30 to 11 pm. Prosecution has also not examined Prince Pal Singh the important witness who was with them at the time of rescue and the only public person and also who received the call from Vijay Verma about escape of Rohit from the captivity.
54. Keeping in view all these contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses, I am of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove this case beyond doubt.
Therefore, benefit of doubt is given to accused and they are acquitted. Accused persons are directed to furnish P/B and S/B in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each for a period of six month u/s 437A Cr.PC.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court today on 27.02.2017 (VIRENDER KUMAR BANSAL) ASJ/Pilot Court/North District Rohini Courts/New Delhi.
State Vs. Ramesh etc. SC No.58041/16 :: 47 ::