Sadre Alam v. The State

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

JULY 22, 2008

B.N.CHATURVEDI, J mb

1 of 29 * HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI + Crl.A. 52/2003 Judgment Reserved on : 22.05.2008 % Judgment delivered on: 22.07.2008 RAI SINGH ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Charu Verma, Advocate Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP AND 2. Crl.A. 628/2003 RAMESH @ PAPPU ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Charu Verma, Advocate Versus STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP AND 2 of 29 3. Crl.A. 294/2003 SADRE ALAM ..... Appellant Through : Ms.Charu Verma, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Richa Kapoor, APP CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.N.Chaturvedi Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Shakdher 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Rajiv Shakdher, J. 1. These are Appeals under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P C against the judgment dated 9.10.2002 and sentence dated 28.10.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi Shri M.S. Sabharwal in Sessions Case No. 40/1999 arising out of FIR No. 81/99 PS Samey Pur Badali. By virtue of the impugned judgment and order the Appellant, Rai Singh, in Criminal Appeal No. 52/2003 has been convicted with respect to 3 of 29 offences under Section 364-A, Section 302, 201 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as also of an offence committed under Section 377 of the Indian Penal code. Similarly, by virtue of the impugned judgment the Appellant, Ramesh alias Pappu being Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 628/2003 has been convicted for offences under Section 364-A/302/377/201 and 34 of IPC. It is important to note that there was no charge against Shri Ramesh @ Pappu under Section 377 of the IPC. Shri Sadre Alam, the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 294/2003 has been convicted and sentenced by the very same judgment for offences under Section 364-A/302/201 and Section 34 of IPC as also under Section 377 of the IPC. 2. We propose to dispose of all the three Appeals by a common judgment as they arise out of the same impugned judgment and order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 3. Before dealing with grounds set out in the Appeal, it would be important to state the case of the prosecution before the trial court. On 7.2.1999 one Shri Prempal Singh R/o N-41/E- 235, Jhuggi, JJ Camp, Suraj Park, Samaypur Badli, Delhi filed a 4 of 29 missing person"s report at around 8.00 pm with the Police Station at Samaypur Badli, Delhi (hereinafter referred to in short as the "said Police Station"). In the report which is exhibited as Ex.PW8/A and which was diarized as Daily Diary Entry No. 31/B it is mentioned that he is a resident of N-41/E-235, Jhuggi, JJ Camp, Suraj Park, Samaypur Badli, Delhi; that today i.e 7.2.1999 since 1.00 pm, his son Pravesh aged about six years who was playing with some children is missing and has not returned home since then. He is further stated to have communicated that even though he had tried to search for the missing child on his own, they had not succeeded and consequently, the report was being filed with the said Police Station. He also supplied the description of his missing son, Parvesh who, he stated, was about 3 ft. in the height and was wearing at the relevant time a sweater having red and green colour stripes and white colour shorts. 4. The said Prempal Singh further went on to state that he had received this information about his child, Parvesh having gone missing on 7.2.99 at around 3.45 pm, when his wife telephoned him at his work place. 5 of 29 5. Since the child could not be found, even after a missing person"s report was lodged on 7.2.1999. Shri Prempal Singh on 9.2.1999 got an FIR registered (Ex PW9/A) under Section 363 of the IPC. The FIR briefly described the events which had transpired till then as follows:- Prempal Singh alongwith his family resided in a Jhuggi bearing No. N-41/E-235, Jhuggi, JJ Camp, Suraj Park, Samaypur Badli, Delhi; he worked as