Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

12. P.W.6 is the informant and grandfather of the victim. He has stated that the occurrence took place on 23.04.2002 at about 7.00 A.M. He was at his house and came to know that his grandson Sagar is missing from the rickshaw. He went to search Sagar with his son Saurabh and others, but could not trace him out. He has stated that Riya Kumari stated about the feathers of the person who had taken Sagar from the rickshaw. He gave written information to the police station. He has identified his signature (Ext.1). He has further stated that on 11.05.2002 a telephone call was received by which Rs.10 lacs as a ransom was demanded for the release of Sagar. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.208 of 2006 dt.05-11-2012 10 After showing inability to pay the ransom, the matter was settled for Rs.6 lacs for the release of Sagar. The kidnapper told him his name as Prem Prakash Yadav who had told him that he had already kidnapped three children and it was the case of 4th kidnapping. After getting some time for the arrangement of the money, he sent Saurabh Kumar on 20.05.2002 to Haldawani carrying money. The kidnaper had given direction to go with VIP bag with monogram 786 written in the corner. When P.W.6 showed his apprehension as to whether it would be safe to travel with the huge amount of money then the telephone caller told him that his man would follow from the beginning of the journey and asked to board in the 4th compartment from the back of the train. As such, his son went with money alone according to the direction of the kidnapper. After paying the ransom his son returned with his grandson on 25.05.2002 by Farakka Train. He has also stated that he has I.D. caller in his telephone, as such; he got the information about the caller of the telephone. He has further stated that the VIP bag which was taken from his son was recovered from the house of Prem Prakash Yadav situated at Barari. He has also been cross- examined at length, but the defence has not been able to discredit his evidence.

18. The learned counsel for the State has submitted that the prosecution witnesses have supported the prosecution case even the victim of the case has also identified the appellants in the court and has also identified who had remained with them during his captive. He has also narrated as to how the appellants were torturing him. The prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There is also material on the record to show that these appellants are the members of a Gang of kidnappers and they are involved in other cases of kidnapping also. As such, this Court is not required to interfere with the conviction and sentence of these appellants.