State Of Haryana vs Sunder Pal And Ors.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 567 OF 2010

STATE OF HARYANA Appellant(s)

VERSUS

SUNDER PAL AND ORS. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J.:

(1) Being aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents-

accused under Section 364-A I.P.C., State of Haryana has

preferred this appeal.

(2) Case of the prosecution is that Complainant-Amit Kumar

son of Madan Mohan aged nine years was kidnapped on 29.05.1996

at around 01.30 pm when he went out to play. On 02.06.1996,

accused-Yashpal came to Madan Mohan and demanded ransom amount

of Rs.10,00,000/-. Madan Mohan, Sanjay Jain and Fakir Chand

decided not to report the matter to police and arranged a sum

of Rs.3,50,000/- in the denomination of Rs.500/-, Rs.100/- and

Rs.50/-. First and the last note of the bundles were initialed

by Madan Mohan as 'MM'. On 03.06.1996, the currency of the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2018.11.14

Rs.10,00,000/- was handed over to Yashpal and on 04.06.1996, 12:58:23 IST Reason:

Yashpal brought back Amit Kumar and he was handed over to Madan

Mohan. After enquiring from Amit Kumar (the victim boy) that 2

he was accosted by Virender and thereafter he was taken by

accused Vinod and Sohan in their motorcycle to Railway Station

Sona Arjunpur where there were other accused namely Pawan,

Pappu, Jagbir, Sunder Pal and Vikas. After the case was

registered, the police carried out a raid and the accused were

apprehended and the cash was recovered from them under the

seizure memo.

(3) Upon consideration of the evidence, the Trial Court

convicted all the accused except Virender (who was not

traceable) under Section 364-A I.P.C. and sentenced them to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. In the appeal

preferred before the High Court, accused – Vikas @ Vicky,

Yashpal, Vidya Sagar, Vishav Pal, Pawan Kumar, Sundar Pal and

Jagbir Singh were acquitted of all the charges by the High

Court. However, the High Court affirmed the conviction of the

accused – Vinod and Sohan and also maintained the sentence of

imprisonment imposed upon them.

(4) We have heard Mr. Alok Sangwan, learned Additional

Advocate General appearing for the appellant-State. M/s. Nidhi

and J.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents

and also perused the impugned judgment and the evidence and

materials on record.

(5) The main witness in the case is of Amit Kumar (PW-2), who

was the kidnapped boy, and in his evidence he has stated that

he was forcibly taken by the accused-Vinod, Sohan and Virender 3

(still absconding) and they made him to sit on the motorcycle

and then he was taken to Sona Arjunpur Railway Station. Amit

Kumar (PW-2) further stated that he was subsequently taken to a

garden near to the said railway station where the other accused

– Pawan, Pappu, Jagbir, Sunder Pal and Vikas were playing

cards. From the evidence of Amit Kumar (PW-2), the High Court

held that the overt act is only attributed to Virender, Vinod

and Sohan who took Amit Kumar (PW-2) on the motorcycle. So far

as other accused, as stated above, are concerned they were only

found playing cards near the Sona Arjunpur Railway Station and

there was no evidence forthcoming against them as to their role

in the kidnapping of Amit Kumar (PW-2) or that they were part

of the conspiracy to Kidnap Amit Kumar (PW-2). The High Court

observed that apart from the evidence of Amit Kumar (PW-2) that

the above named accused were found playing cards near to the

Sona Arjunpur Railway Station from where Amit Kumar (PW-2) was

taken, there was no evidence against the said accused. The

High Court held that the prosecution against the above named

accused has not been established beyond reasonable doubt.

When the view taken by the High Court is a plausible view and

cannot be said to be suffering from any serious infirmity, we

do not find any ground warranting interference with the

impugned judgment.

(6) Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-accused have

stated that accused – Sunder Pal, Vidya Sagar and Yashpal have

passed away after the filing of this petition. Learned counsel 4

for the State, Mr. Alok Sangwan submitted that he would verify

the same.

(7) We, however, considered the matter on merits, we do not

find any good ground warranting interference in the impugned

judgment. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

..........................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

..........................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE) NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 31, 2018.