- (1.) Mr. Firoz Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Mohd. Yusuf Ansari, learned A.G.A. for the State were heard at length.
(2.) Under challenge in the instant jail appeal is the judgment and order dated 13.04.2007 passed by 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad, in Sessions Trial No. 231 of 2003, arising out of Case Crime No.729 of 2003, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Faizabad, whereby the present appellant Amrendra Dubey was convicted for the offence under Section 364-A IPC and was sentenced with imprisonment for life and also with fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation of two months' rigorous imprisonment.
(3.) In brief, the case of the prosecution was that the complainant Gaya Prasad Mishra lodged a first information report at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Faizabad on 29.03.2003 at 12.30 PM alleging therein that on 26.03.2003 at about 8.00 AM, his son and daughters had gone to the school. Appellant Amrendra Dubey, who happens to be the real brother-in-law (Jeeja) of the complainant went to the school along with his son and through his son called the victim Sanjay Mishra on the pretext of purchasing cricket bat and providing it to him and took him on his motorcycle. The Principal of the school informed the complainant about the absence of his son on the same day through the school peon then the complainant throughout the day remained busy in the search of his son at the village of his relatives but no information could be gathered. In the evening at about 07.30 PM a phone call was received whereby a demand of Rs.15,000/- was made then the complainant could become aware that his son has been kidnapped. So, under these compelling circumstances, he took the help of the police. The police took action and in the same night i.e. in the night of 26/27.03.2003 raided the house of the appellant situated in village Punhad, Police Station Maharajganj and also in the adjoining villages. The villagers were informed with the situation however the police could not search him out. With the help of villagers, the victim was recovered from a sugarcane field. The appellant could not be arrested by the villagers. Subsequently someone made a phone call in the school and from there the complainant got the information. So he went there along with the local police where the victim was handed over to him. As stated earlier, the first information report of this case was lodged on 29.03.2003 i.e. after two days after the recovery of the victim. During investigation, on 04.04.2003 appellant was arrested on a secret information along with the motorcycle. However, no recovery memo of the motorcycle was prepared. Here it is pertinent to mention that initially the first information report was registered under Section 347 IPC and after completing the investigation, the police filed charge sheet under Section 364 IPC only. During investigation it came into light that the appellant was the husband of Maya Devi (elder sister of the complainant who died in December, 2001) and the appellant wanted to marry the younger sister of the complainant Km. Neetu but because of the age difference between them, the said proposal of marriage was declined by the complainant and therefore the appellant was nursing grudge against the complainant and because of that grudge, he has committed this offence.;