UPENDRA YADAV, S/O RAMESHWAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2018-7-82
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on July 28,2018

Upendra Yadav, S/O Rameshwar Yadav Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 05.04.2008 and the order of sentence dated 09.04.2008, passed by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. IV, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 151 of 2003, whereby the appellant on being convicted for the offences, punishable under Sections 364 (A) and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default clause.
(2.) The case of the prosecution, as has been projected by the informant, the uncle of the victim (PW 10), is that on 16.01.2002, at about 7.30 A.M, when his nephew, namely, Ranjeet Kumar, son of Mr.Arun Prasad Keshri, was sitting in his sweets' ('Peda') shop, three boys aged about 28 to 30 year came to his shop and ordered for 10 K.G. of sweets ('Peda') for which, an advance of Rs.100 was given and they told the victim boy to deliver the same in Room No. 19, Gupta Hotel at Jalshar Road and the rest amount will be paid there. At about 11.00 A.M., Ranjeet Kumar alongwith his staff went to the Hotel to deliver the sweets. The accused persons behaved friendly with the victim and offered him tea. Due to delay, the staff of the victim was sent back to the shop. Thereafter, as per the hotel manager, a White Ambassador car came to the hotel and all the persons left the hotel after loading their baggages but the victim did not come back home. In the evening, family, members frantically searched the victim, every nook and corner, but, could not find him. Thereafter, in the night, the father of the victim Arun Prasad Keshri alongwith his neighbours informed the Police regarding the missing of his son. On the very next day, unknown phone call was received, and a caller threatened the family members that their son is in their custody and if it is informed to the Police, the child will face the dire consequences. Being threatened over phone, the family members became scared and did not go to the Police Station for further action.
(3.) On the basis of the written report, an FIR was instituted against the unknown persons under Sections 365, 367/34, 364/120B I.P.C. The Investigating Officer took up the investigation and after conclusion of the investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the accused persons including the appellant. Thereafter, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the appellant was put on trial.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.