Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(17) PW7 HC Balraj Singh is a formal witness being the Duty Officer who has proved the departure entry made by Inspector Virender Kadyan, SHO Adarsh Nagar vide DD No.30 with SI A.P. Singh, ASI Shashi Kumar, Ct. Amit, Ct. Mehndi Hassan, HC Vinod and Ct. Rahul Tyagi in the investigation of Case FIR No.179/11 which is Ex.PW7/A. This witness has also not been cross examined by the accused persons despite opportunity.
(18) PW9 Ms. Shunali Gupta Ld. MM has proved that on 19.07.2011 she was working as Link MM of Sh. Neeraj Gaur, Ld. MM and he marked an application moved by Investigating Officer SI A.P. Singh for recording the statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C of Child witness namely 'P' S/o Dharamber, aged about 6 years which application is Ex.PW9/A. She has further proved that on 19.07.2011 at 03.00 PM she recorded the statement of child witness 'P' and before recording the statement she asked certain questions from 'P' to ascertain whether he can understand the question and reply properly and thereafter she recorded the statement of the child which is Ex.PW1/A. She has also proved that she had given a certificate regarding the correctness of the statement U/s.

(21) The witness has further deposed that on 19.07.2011 he alongwith SI AP Singh, Ct. Amit and accused Dal Chand reached at Jhuggies at Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi and accused Dal Chand opened a number lock of his jhuggi and his disclosure statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer which Ex.PW11/C­1. According to him, one mobile phone was recovered at the instance of accused Dal Chand belonging to him of make NOKIA with SIM and battery which was sealed and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW11/D. The witness has also deposed that the accused Dal Chand disclosed that he had used the said mobile phone to make contact with Raj Kishore and others. According to witness on the same night he again went to the Police Station Basrehar along with SI AP Singh and accused Sanjay Yadav and Ct. Ramesh of UP Police was joined in the investigations. He has further deposed that at the instance of accused Sanjay Yadav at Village Chakwan Khurd two mobile phones make LAVA and one more phone were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW11/E. According to the witness, thereafter they went to the house of Manish but he was not found there and thereafter they reached Police Station Basrehar. Witness has further deposed that while they were going to the railway station, on the pointing out of accused Sanjay Yadav at Mandi Gate, Itawah City, UP accused Manish Chand Yadav was apprehended and arrested in this case vide Ex.PW11/F, his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW11/G and his disclosure statement was recorded vide Ex.PW11/H. According to witness, one mobile phone was also recovered from the possession of accused Manish which was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW11/I. (22) The witness has correctly identified the accused Dal Chand, Raj Kishore and Manish in the Court and also identified the case property i.e. mobile phone make LAVA KKT­30 and another mobile phone of G­five M­55 recovered from the possession of Sanjay Yadav which are Ex.P­1 and Ex.P­2 respectively; mobile phone of vodafone bearing IO­Souno and I­18 which was recovered from the possession of Manish which is Ex.P­3 and another mobile phone of NOKIA recovered at the instance of accused Dal Chand which is Ex.P­4. (23) In his cross­examination by the Ld. Defence Counsel the witness has deposed that on 14.7.2011 they started from the police station at about 11:30 PM in a private Tata Sumo. He has testified that secret informer was with the UP police when they reached the village and the secret informer did not tell the description of the accused persons at the time of giving secret information. He has admitted that some villagers had gathered when they reached the village and has stated that the Investigating Officer did not ask any public person to join the investigations after reaching the village. The witness has also admitted that Dharambir also accompanied them to the first floor from where the child was recovered. According to him, the accused Dal Chand was apprehended by Ct. Amit and he himself apprehended the accused Raj Kishore. He has also deposed that the writing work was done while sitting on the boundary wall of the room and it took about two to two and a half hours in the writing work. Witness has further stated that some documents were prepared while sitting at Police Station Basrehar and deposed that the disclosure statement of accused Dal Chand and Raj Kishore were not recorded at the said village as the same were recorded at Police Station Adarsh Nagar. He has testified that on 19.7.2011 they reached at the Jhuggi of accused Dal Chand at about 11:00 AM in a Government vehicle and it took about 15 minutes in recording the disclosure of accused Dal Chand. Witness has further deposed that the mobile phone was recovered from a suit case lying at the jhuggi of Dal Chand. He has admitted that the suit case was unlocked at that time and that the mobile phone recovered at the instance of accused is easily available in the market. He has testified that accused Manish was apprehended on 20.7.2011 at about 9:00 PM. He has denied the suggestion that accused Manish was lifted from his native village after five­six days of the incident or that he did not join the investigations of this case. He has also denied that the accused persons have been falsely implicated in order to workout the present case. (24) PW12 HC Radhey Shyam is a formal witness being the MHCM who has been examined by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW12/1 (as per the provisions of Section 296 Cr.P.C.) wherein he has proved the entries in register no. 19 vide S.No. 3508/11, 3518/11 and S.No. 3523/11 which are Ex.PW12/A, Ex.PW12/B and Ex.PW12/C respectively. He has not been cross­examined by the Ld. Defence Counsel despite opportunity and his testimony has gone uncontroverted. (25) PW13 HC Ram Chander deposed that on 16.7.2011 he was posted at Police Station Basrehar, Distt. Etawa, U.P. and on that day he was working as Head Moharrar for recording the entires in the general diary (Roj Namcha). According to the witness, at about 15:10 hours, Delhi Police came at the police station and the entry was made by him in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/A. He has further deposed that at about 16:35 hours the Delhi Police departed with the Station Officer SI Deep Kumar with other staff of the police station Basrehar for investigation and entry was made in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/B. Witness has further deposed that on the same day at about 20:30 hours the above said police officials returned back to the police station and entry was made in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/C. According to him, on 20.7.2011 at about 8:00 AM SI A. P. Singh of Delhi Police along with staff reached at his police station and made the arrival entries in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/D. Witness has further deposed that SI A. P. Singh also departed with the staff and made entires in the Roj Namcha at about 13:25 hours vide Ex.PW13/E. (26) In his cross­examination the witness has denied the suggestion that the above mentioned entries are fabricated and entered ante­datedly only to facilitate the investigation of Delhi Police. (27) PW14 SI Deep Kumar (Police Station Vaidpura, Distt. Etawa , UP) has deposed that on 16.7.2011 he was posted at Police Station Busrehar, Distt. Etawa as Station Officer and on that day Inspector Virender of Delhi Police came at police station along with other staff including SI A.P. Singh and father of kidnapped boy Dharambir. According to him, the entry was made in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/A after which he along with SI Shyam Lal Yadav and Ct. Ramesh Kumar of their Police Station with SOG Staff joined the Delhi Police team for conducting raid at Village Chakwan Khurd. He has deposed that they departed from the Police Station at about 16:35 hours and they made entry in the Roj Namcha vide Ex.PW13/B. He has further deposed that when they reached petrol pump Busrehar at about 16:45 hours one secret informer met him there who informed him that the kidnapped boy of Delhi was kept in the village Chakwan Khurd in the house of Manish Yadav. The witness has testified that they asked some public persons to join the investigations but none agreed. He has stated that they did not serve any notice to any public person due to shortage of time and thereafter without wasting further time they reached the house of Manish Yadav but on seeing them Manish Yadav ran away. According to the witness, they apprehended accused Dal Chand and found the kidnapped boy 'P' aged about 6 years in the room and accused Raj Kishore who kept vigil on the boy. The witness has further testified that SI AP Singh prepared the recovery memo regarding the boy 'P' which is Ex.PW8/F after which the accused Dal Chand was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/B, his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW8/C, accused Raj Kishore was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/D and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW8/E. He has also deposed that accused Dal Chand and Raj Kishore were interrogated during which they disclosed about Sanjay Yadav (Juvenile) and thereafter they reached the house of Sanjay Yadav in the same village from where Sanjay was arrested vide Ex.PW8/G and his personal search was taken vide Ex.PW8/J. He has further deposed that after these proceedings they returned back to the Police Station and made their arrival entry in the Roj Namcha at 20:30 hours vide Ex.PW13/C. He has correctly identified the accused Raj Kishore and Dal Chand in the Court. (28) In his cross­examination the witness has deposed that Delhi Police came to their Police Station at about 15:10 hours. He has admitted that the house of Manish was situated in the residential area. According to the witness, they did not obtain the names and addresses of the persons who refused to join the proceedings and has voluntarily explained that they did not have sufficient time to do so. The witness has further deposed that Pradhan of the village namely Huri Lal after the arrest of the accused persons and all the writing work was done in the Verandha of the house of Manish. He has denied the suggestion that he did not join the investigations or that the entries in the Roj Namcha have been fabricated at the instance of Delhi Police. (29) PW15 Ct. Ramesh Kumar Yadav has deposed that on 16.7.2011 he was posted at Police Station Basrehar, Distt. Etawa , U.P. and on that day at about 4:40 PM he along with SI Deep Kumar, SI Shyam Lal with Delhi Police officials and father of the kidnapped boy departed from the Police Station towards village Chakwan Khurd and on the way one secret informer disclosed that the kidnapped boy from Delhi was kept in the house of Manish in the village Chakwan Khurd. According to the witness, when they reached the house of Manish Yadav, Dal Chand was found on the gate of the room situated at the first floor of the house where the child was kept and he was apprehended by them and when they entered the house Raj Kishore was found with the kidnapped child 'P' aged about 6 years. The witness has further testified that SI AP Singh prepared the recovery memo regarding the boy 'P' which is Ex.PW8/F after which the accused Dal Chand was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/B, his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW8/C, accused Raj Kishore was arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/D and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW8/E. He has also deposed that accused Dal Chand and Raj Kishore were interrogated during which they disclosed about Sanjay Yadav (Juvenile) and thereafter they reached the house of Sanjay Yadav in the same village from where Sanjay was arrested vide Ex.PW8/G and his personal search was taken vide Ex.PW8/J. The witness has further deposed that thereafter they returned back to the Police Station at about 8:30 PM. According to the witness on 20.7.2011 he again joined the investigations with SI A.P. Singh who along with his staff and accused Sanjay again reached at Police Station Basrehar at about 8:00 AM. He has testified that they all reached at village Chakwan Khurd after making the entry at the police and at the instance of Sanjay Yadav two mobile phones were recovered from a box lying in the room which mobile phones were seized vide memo Ex.PW1/E. (30) He has correctly identified the accused Raj Kishore and Dal Chand in the Court and also identified the case property i.e. two mobile phones one make Lava KK30 and another of G­Five M­55 which were recovered at the instance of Sanjay Yadav which mobile phones are Ex.P­1 and Ex.P­2. This witness has been cross­examined by the Ld. Defence Counsel but nothing much has come out of the same. (31) PW16 Inspector Arvind Pratap Singh is the Investigating Officer of the present case who has deposed that on 12.07.2011 at about 4.30PM complainant Dharambir came to the police station and informed that that his son namely 'P' was missing since 5.00PM on 11.07.2011 on which he recorded his statement Ex.PW8/A and converted the same into a tehrir vide his endorsement Ex.PW16/A which he handed over to the Duty Officer for registration of the case. Witness has further deposed that he accompanied the complainant to Lal Bagh and tried to search for the missing child at Azadpur Bus Terminal and Railway Station but the child could not traced. He has also deposed that he came back to the Police Station and sent WT messages to all SSPs and DCPs in Delhi and all over India vide Ex.PW16/B and entered the detail of the child in the Zip Net and also issued hue and cry notices. According to him, on 14.07.2011 the complainant Dharamvir came to the police station and informed that he had received a call on his mobile bearing no. 9953716681 on 13.07.2011 at around 8.00PM from number 9058435350 from an unknown person that the child was with them and in case if he wanted to keep child alive he should pay them the ransom of Rs. Twenty Lacs. Witness has further deposed that Dharambir further informed him that on 14.07.2011 at about 1.00PM he again received a ransom call from another mobile bearing no. 9528839799, wherein the caller threatened to kill his child in case he informed the police or anybody else. He has also deposed that Dharambir informed him that he told the caller that he was ready to pay the ransom but he should be allowed to talk to his child to ensure that his child was alive on which the caller told him that he would make him talk to the child in the evening. He has testified that Dharambir further informed him that on 14.07.2011 at about 8.40PM he received another call from the same number and had spoken to his child on the said number and also told the caller that they should decrease the amount of the ransom and give him three­four days' time on which caller had given him two days' time to arrange for the money. He has proved having recorded the supplementary statement of Dharambir and informed the senior officer and also obtained the call detail records of the numbers which Dharambir had given to him. The witness has further deposed that from the call detail record it was revealed that the said calls were being made from Etawa, UP and one of the numbers i.e. 9990834556 was constantly in touch with the complainant as well as the person who had called on 13.07.2011 and on inquiry from Dharambir about the above number i.e. 9990834556 it was revealed that said number belongs Dal Chand who was grandson in relation of Dharambir. The witness has also deposed that they reached the Jhuggi of Dal Chand along with Dharambir but could not found him and they came to know that Dal Chand had gone to his native village i.e. village near Mainpuri and had relatives in Etawa, U.P. According to him, they immediately prepared a team consisting of himself, Ct. Amit, Ct. Mehandi Hassan, ASI Shashi Kumar, SHO Virender Kadyan and Ct. Rahul Tyagi. He has testified that they gave their contact numbers to Dharambir and told him to contact them at Etawa, UP and on 14.07.2011 at 11.45PM they started for Etawa after leaving a message for Dharambir at the Police Station. He has testified that on 15.07.2011 at 6:30 PM Dharambir came to the Police Station and informed that he had received another ransom call from the same number i.e. 9528839799 and when the Duty Officer conveyed to them this message they asked Dharambir to reach Etawa police line where they would be waiting for him. The witness has further deposed that meanwhile they came to know the relative of Dharambir that one of the relatives of Dal Chand was residing at Chakwan Khurd, Etawa and Dal Chand was frequently visiting there. (32) The Investigating Officer has further deposed that on 16.07.2011 they reached at Police Station Basrehar, Etawa in which they made DD entry regarding their arrival and complainant Dharambir also met them there. He has also deposed that they constituted a raiding party and joined local police officials i.e. SI Deep Kumar, Ct. Ramesh Kumar, SI Shyam Lal, Ct Mohd. Ahmed and two or three persons in their raiding party after which at 4.35PM they left the Police Station for Chakwan Khurd. According to the witness, as soon as they reached near petrol pump they met a secret informer who informed them that a child had been kidnapped from Delhi and brought to the village Chakwan Khurd and if raided immediately the life of the child could be saved. He has testified that he made a request to two or three passers­byes to join the police party but they refused and went away without disclosing their names and address after which without wasting any time they reached at the outskirts of village Chakwan Khurd and parked their vehicles outside the village. The witness has also deposed that the informer told them that the child was in the house of Manish Yadav after which they went towards the house of Manish Yadav but before they could reach to his house they noticed that one boy was sitting outside the house on seeing them immediately ran inside a house on getting suspicious they followed him into the house and found that on the room at the first floor one boy i.e. Dal Chand was standing outside. According to the witness, when they went inside the said room they found the child 'P' inside and one another boy sitting inside the room with 'P' whose name they came to know as Raj Kishore. The witness has also deposed that on inquiries from the said boys they came to know that there was one more boy with them namely Sanjay Yadav who had gone to his house and the boy who was keeping a watch outside the house was Manish Yadav who had run away. He has proved having prepared the recovery memo of the child vide Ex.PW8/F; having prepared the arrest memo of Dal Chand vide Ex.PW8/B; his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW8/C; having prepared arrest memo of Raj Kishore vide Ex.PW8/D and his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW8/E. The witness has also deposed that accused Dal Chand then took them to the house of Sanjay Yadav from where the accused Sanjay Yadav was apprehended and arrested vide memo Ex.PW8/G and his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW8/J. According to him, since it had become very dark and a large number of villagers were collected then they returned to the police station where they interrogated the accused at length and then recorded the statement of various witness. He has also deposed that on 16.07.2011 they started for Delhi where they reached on 17.07.2011 in the morning where all the three accused persons were interrogated and they disclosed their involvement in the kidnapping of the child 'P'. He has proved having recorded the disclosure statements of the accused Dal Chand, Raj Kishore and Sanjay Yadav which are Ex.PW11/A, Ex.PW11/B and Ex.PW11/C. He has further deposed that after getting the medical examination of accused persons they were produced before the Ld. Magistrate and four days' Police Custody remand was obtained. According to him, the child 'P' was produced before the Ld. MM and was handed over to the custody of his parents by the court. The witness has also deposed that on 18.07.2011 they tried to search for the accused Manish Yadav as the accused disclosed that he could be found in Delhi but despite efforts they could not find him and hence they returned to the police station. He has testified that on 19.07.2011 the accused Dal Chand disclosed that he could get recovered the mobile phone from his jhuggi from which he used to talk to the complainant and to his co­ accused /associates. He has proved having recorded the supplementary disclosure statement of accused Dal Chand vide Ex.PW11/C­1 and has deposed that pursuant to the same the accused Dal Chand took them to his jhuggi at Lal Bagh. The witness has also deposed that they requested three­four passers­byes to join them in the proceedings but they refused and hence without wasting of time they went to his jhuggi there Dal Chand had put a numbered lock on his jhuggi and after feeding the necessary number he opened the same and from the jhuggi he got a mobile phone recovered from a suit case which was NOKIA­1616 containing a SIM of Idea bearing number 9990834556 . He has proved having seized the same vide memo Ex.PW11/D. According to the witness on the same day i.e. 19.07.2011 he asked Dharambir to reach at Rohini Court alongwith his child because his statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C was to be recorded. He has also deposed that he then went to the court and moved an application before the Ld. MM for recording of statement vide Ex.PW9/A pursuant to which the proceedings U/s 164 Cr. P.C. was conducted by Ld. MM vide Ex.PW16/C and the statement of the child U/s 164 Cr. P. C. was recorded vide Ex.PW1/A. According to him, after the statement was recorded he moved an application for getting copy of the same vide Application Ex.PW9/B which application was allowed by the Ld. MM. He has further deposed that during the intervening night of 19/20.07.2011 he alongwith Ct. Amit Kumar, Ct. Mehandi Hassan and accused Sanjay Yadav left for village Chakwan Khurd Distt. Etawa UP and reached Police Station Basrehar on 20.07.2011 and made their entry, then they joined the local police in the police party and left for village Chakwan Khurd. According to the witness, when they reached the village he requested three­four public persons to join the police party but they refused and hence without wasting the time they accompanied Sanjay Yadav to his house from where he got recovered two mobile phone from his house from a black coloured box i.e. one mobile had the words Lava writing on the body and was containing the SIM bearing no. 9528839799 from which the ransom call had been made and the other mobile had words G Five written on it having a SIM bearing no. 9045201176. According to the witness, the accused Sanjay informed that the said mobile belong to Raj Kishore on which he used to talk to accused Raj Kishore and from which Raj Kishore used to speak to Dal Chand. He has proved having seized both the mobile phones vide memo Ex.PW11/E. The witness has deposed that thereafter they went to the house of Manish Yadav but he could not be found there. According to him, they also went to the neighboring villages i.e. Village Tikupur and Chaubia and then returned to the police station and made their arrival/ wapsi entry. The witness has testified that while they were going to the railway station and reached near Subzi Mandi, accused Sanjay Yadav pointed out towards a boy who was standing in front of the gate of the Mandi and informed that he was Manish Yadav the co­accused for whom they were tracing. He has also deposed that on this they apprehended the accused Manish Yadav who was arrested vide memo Ex.PW11/C and his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW11/C. According to the witness, during the search the accused handed over his mobile phone to them bearing the words i­18 written on the same having the SIM of number 9627469605 from which he used to talk to his other associates on which he (witness) seized the same vide Ex.PW11/I. The witness has proved having interrogated the accused Manish thoroughly and recorded his disclosure vide Ex.PW11/H. He has also deposed that thereafter, they returned to Delhi and deposited the case property in the Malkhana and recorded the statements of various witnesses. The witness has further deposed that on 10.10.2011 the certified copies of the call detail record and the caller application forms were obtained from the service providers and he also recorded the statements of the various nodal officers. He has proved having prepared the charge sheet after recording the statements of various witnesses and filed the same in the court against the accused Dal Chand, Raj Kishore and Manish Chand. According to him, since the accused Sanjay Yadav was found to be a juvenile his charge sheet was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board. He has correctly identified the accused Dal Chand, Raj Kishore and Manish in the Court and also identified the case property i.e. mobile phone of LAVA KKT­30 and another mobile phone of G­Five - M­55 recovered from the possession of Sanjay Yadav which mobile phones are Ex.P1 and Ex.P2; mobile phone of Vodafone bearing IO­Sonuno and I­18 recovered from the possession of accused Manish which mobile phone is Ex.P3 and one mobile phone of NOKIA recovered at the instance of accused Dal Chand which mobile phone is Ex.P4.

2. That on 19.07.2011 at 03.00 PM she recorded the statement of child witness 'P' and before recording the statement she asked certain questions from 'P' to ascertain whether he can understand the question and reply properly and thereafter she recorded the statement of the child which is Ex.PW1/A.

(51) Applying these principles to the facts of the present case, coming first to the statement of the child witness 'P' before the Court. I may observe that prior to recording of the statement of the child the Ld. Predecessor of this court had satisfied himself with regard to the understanding of the child to the extent that he was capable of understanding the nature of the queries being put to him and was giving rational answers only after which he proceeded to record the statement of the child, the relevant portion of which is as under: