6. The appellants abjured their guilt and pleaded not guilty.
7. The Prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined Rambaran (P.W.1), Praveen (P.W.2), Jitendra Yadav (P.W.3), Ramdutt (P.W.4), Pintu Sharma (P.W.5), Ramprakash (P.W.6), Ramniwas (P.W.7), D.J. Rai (P.W.8), Parimal Singh (P.W.9), Santosh (P.W.10), Shailendra Singh (P.W.11), Ramal Singh (P.W.12) and Ravi Yadav (P.W.13). The appellants examined Devi Dayal (D.W.1), Nathu Singh (D.W.2) and Ram Sewak Yadav (D.W.3).
8. The Trial Court after considering the documentary as well as oral evidence, convicted the appellant Gappe @ Vimlesh under Section 364-A of I.P.C. read with Section 11/13 of M.P.D.V.P.K. Act and sentenced to undergo the Life Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default sentence and appellant Raju @ Ganga Singh under Section Section 364- A/120-B of I.P.C. read with Section 11/13 of M.P.D.V.P.K. Act and sentenced to undergo the Life Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default imprisonment.
9. Challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court, it is submitted by the Counsel for the appellants that the appellant Gappe @ Vimlesh was falsely implicated as Dharam Singh, father of one of abductee Jitendra, was an accused for murder of one Pappu and the grand mother of appellant Gappe @ Vimlesh was the eye witness in the said case. As the father of Jitendra was insisting that the family of Gappu should compromise the matter and since, it was refused by them, therefore, he has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that since, the police had killed to innocent persons namely Lalla and Munesh by showing a fake encounter, therefore, the police had a reason to concoct a false story of kidnapping of Jitendra and Praveen. It is further submitted that the entire prosecution case is based on the testimony of interested witnesses as Rambaran (P.W.1), Praveen (P.W.2), Santosh (P.W.10) and Shailendra (P.W.11) are closely related to each other as Rambaran (P.W.1) and Praveen (P.W.2) are father and son whereas Santosh (P.W.10) and Shailendra (P.W.11) are nephews of Rambaran (P.W.1). Similarly Ramdutt (P.W.4) and Jitendra (P.W.3) are uncle and nephew.
10. Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Praveen and Jitendra were taken away by the appellant Gappe @ Vimlesh by alluring them to gift a mobile phone and handed over them to Lalla and Dinesh. Thereafter a phone call on the mobile of Rambaran (P.W.1) was made, informing that the children are in the captivity of Satpal Lodhi and whether Rambaran has received any letter or not? On 24-10-2006, Rambaran received a letter which was in the handwriting of Praveen in which it was mentioned about the demand and kidnapping of Praveen and Jitendra. A note was also appended at the bottom of the letter that Rambaran should meet with Raju who is detained in Itawah Jail. On 24-10-2006 itself, Rambaran went to Itawah Jail and met with Raju who demanded Rs. 6 lakhs. Later on, two more letters written by Praveen and Jitendra were received. The police was informed and F.I.R. was lodged. Subsequently, Rambaran paid Rs. 6 lacs to a person and consequently, Praveen and Jitendra were released and they came back to their house on 6-11-2006. The police took them to the spot, where an encounter took place between police party and Lalla and Munesh, and both Lalla and Munesh died. Thus, it was submitted that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and the judgment and sentence passed by the Trial Court, does not call for any interference.