VISHNUDEO NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant named above against the judgment dated 27.4.1996 passed in S.T. No. 5 of 1994 by Shri Shree Prakash Rai, 5th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder he along with two co -accused person, namely, Raj Kumar Pandit and Namuddin Ansari have been found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 364/34 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years for the offence under Section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It is relevant to mention here that the accused Raj Kumar Pandit and Naimuddin Ansari had preferred Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 1996 against the impugned judgment whereby they were convicted and the said appeal was allowed by the Bench of this Court as per judgment dated 20.3.2001 and the impugned judgment regarding their conviction was set aside and they were acquitted. Appellant Sibu Ganjhu was in custody and he did not file an appeal against the impugned judgment and after the acquittal of the aforesaid two appellants, namely Raj Kumar Pandit and Naimuddin Ansari, this appellant preferred this appeal from jail on 26.6.2002.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report (Ext. 2/1) of PW 3, Bhukli Devi, the mother of Seema Kumari, aged about 6 or 7 years who is the deceased of this case lodged before the Khelari P.S. on 6.7.1993 at 16.45 hours regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 3.7.1993 at 19.00 hours at H.M.P. Colony, "G" Type Ghowra, P.S. Khelari, District Ranchi and on the basis of the written report, formal F.I.R (Ext. 2) was drawn and the case was instituted on 6.7,1993. The written report and the formal F.I.R. was received in the Court of C.J.M., Ranchi on 7.1993. The prosecution case as per Ext. 2/1, in brief, is that Seema Kumari aged about 6 -7 years was playing in H.M.P. Colony, "G" Type Ghowra in the evening of 3.7.1993 and she became traceless since 7.00 PM on that day and in course of her hectic search it transpired from PW 1, Sita Kumari and PW 2, Phulwa Devi that this appellant Sibu Ganjhu had kidnapped Seema Kumari. It is alleged that when the appellant did not bring back Seema Kumari to her house, Somra Uraon, Binod Ganjhu and several other persons of the Mohalla apprehended Sibu Ganjhu from Ojha Saran within P.S. Chanho and brought him to the said colony and he confessed before them and the persons assembled there that at the instigation of Raj Kumar Pandit and Naimuddin Ansari and as per their planning he had kidnapped Seema Kumari on the pretext of providing her loaf because of the fact that Raj Kumar Pandit and Naimuddin Ansari had a quarrel with the father of Seema Kumari in course of eating and drinking and, thereafter, this appellant along with them carried Seema Kumari to Selari Magazine Purna Jungle and they have committed the murder of Seema Kumari and had thrown her dead body there. It is further alleged that as per the confessional statement of the appellant Sibu Ganjhu, the persons assembled there went to A.C.C. Magazine, Purna Selari Jungle along with the appellant where the skeleton of Seema Kumari was found as pointed by the appellant and the said skeleton was identified being the skeleton of Seema Kumari as per green bangles in one hand and white bangles in the other hand of the said skeleton as well as her old yellow check frock and brown panty by the informant and her husband PW 4. Arjun Bhuyan and several other persons of the Mohalla. It is alleged that the appellant Sibu Ganjhu had kidnapped Seema Kumari while she was playing which has been witnessed by PW 1, Sita Kumari and PW 2, Phulwa Devi and, therefore, the appellant Sibu Ganjhu along with two acquitted appellants have committed her murder due to enmity and, therefore, written report was lodged before the police and the appellant Sibu Ganjhu was produced before the police and the people of the locality collected there had also assaulted the appellant Sibu Ganjhu.
(3.) THE appellant has pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against him and he claims himself to be innocent and to have committed no offence and that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity.;