- (1.)These appeals arise out of a judgment dated 14.01.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitting the respondent No.4 Mohan and respondent No. 5 Neetu (in Crl. A. 366/2011) and on orders on quantum dated 19.01.2011 whereby respondent No.3/Rakesh (in Crl. A. 366/2011) was sentenced for a period of imprisonment already undergone i.e. five years for committing the offence under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing respondent No.2/Raj Kumar @ Bhola (Appellant in Crl. A. 582/2011) to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for committing the offences punishable under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs.1,000/- for committing the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one and half months. All sentences are to run concurrently. Appellant Raj Kumar @ Bhola (Respondent No.2 in Crl. A. No. 366/2011) also preferred an appeal No. Crl. A. No. 582/2011 against the aforesaid conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court.
(2.)Briefly stated, the incident that eventually culminated into the death of the Ashok @ Bunty, son of Ram Kishan, appellant in Crl. A. No. 366/2011 and the consequent prosecution of the appellant/father are that on 06.12.2005, Ashok @ Bunty went missing and did not return home; that his family members made every efforts to trace him but all in vain; that on 07.12.2005, they made a call at 100 number about the same; that on 08.12.2005, appellant lodged a complaint with Police Station Kalyan Puri, Delhi with respect to his missing son; that on 08.09.2005, his younger son gave him a jacket of his missing son which contained a ransom letter pasted with a tape on the pocket of the jacket demanding Rs.10 Lacs for release of his missing son; that he along with his brother went to the police station and narrated the entire incident which was reproduced in writing and an FIR under Section 364A Indian Penal Code was registered; that on 12.12.2005, appellant received the shirt of his missing son containing another ransom letter threatening to kill his son in case the police was informed; that the second letter was also brought to the notice of the police and appellant reached the place mentioned in the ransom letter but none turned up at the spot; that on 16.12.2005, police recovered a dead body in the drain near Sabzi Mandi, Ghazipur in a decomposed condition which the appellant could not identify as that of Ashok @ Bunty; that on 15.01.2006, Jai Prakash, brother of the appellant apprehended accused Rakesh when he threw the third ransom letter at his door; that accused Rakesh was handed over to the police along with the third ransom letter wherein a demand of Rs.15 Lacs was made; that on interrogation by the police, accused Rakesh disclosed that he had thrown the ransom letter on the asking of accused Raj Kumar @ Bhola; that accused Rakesh led the police to Village Bhouvapur, District Ghaziabad to the house of Mohan; that on pointing of accused Rakesh, accused Raj Kumar @ Bhola was apprehended and on his pointing out a dairy with some missing papers was recovered; that on interrogation, accused Raj Kumar @ Bhola disclosed that he along with accused Neetu and Mohan kidnapped and killed Ashok @ Bunty; that they took Ashok @ Bunty to Subzi Mandi, T-Point, NH-24 and killed him and threw his body in the drain; that accused Raj Kumar led the police to the spot and got recovered two stones with bloodstains on it along with chappal and pant of the deceased; that on 07.01.2006, both accused Neetu and Mohan were apprehended from Village Nand Gram, District Ghaziabad; that all articles of his missing son were identified by the appellant during the Test Identification Parade; that DNA report established the identity of dead body as of Ashok @ Bunty; that after investigation, charge sheet under Section 364A/302/201/120B of Indian Penal Code was filed in court.
(3.)To bring home the guilt against the accused persons, prosecution examined 23 witnesses in all. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons while recording their statement under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure wherein they denied all the allegations and alleged false implication and claimed to be tried.
Crl. A. No. 366/2011

Respondent No.3/Rakesh