Judgment Uma Nath Singh, J. 1. This judgment shall also dispose of connected Criminal Appeal No. 105-DB of 2007, filed by accused-appellants as both the matters arise out of the judgment dated 20/21.12.2006 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, in Sessions Trial No. 24 of 3.9.2005 (Sessions Case No. 11 of 19.4.2005), holding all the accused appellants guilty of offences on four counts, namely, under Section 302 IPC, Section 364A IPC, Section 201 IPC, and Section 120-B IPC, and sentencing them as follows : Name of the Accused Convicted under Section Sentence Imposed Vikram Singh @ Vicky 302 IPC death. -do- 364A IPC death. -do- 201 IPC RI for seven years. -do- 120-B IPC RI for seven years. Jasvir Singh @ Jassa 302 IPC death. -do- 364A IPC death. -do- 201 IPC RI for seven years. -do- 120-B IPC RI for seven years. Sonia 302 IPC death. -do- 364A IPC death. -do- 201 IPC RI for seven years. -do- 201 IPC RI for seven years. -do- 120-B IPC RI for seven years. 2. As per prosecution case, on 14.2.2005, deceased Abhi Verma @ Harry, a minor boy aged about 16 years and a student, son of a Goldsmith of Hoshiarpur, Ravi Verma (PW27), was kidnapped and done to death in diabolical and dastardly manner by accused appellants Vikram Singh @ Vicky, his friend Jasvir Singh @ Jassa, and Sonia wife of Jasvir Singh by hatching a criminal conspiracy with each other. At about 8.45 AM, on the date of occurrence, i.e., 14.2.2005, pursuant to an anonymous call on telephone giving information about kidnapping of a child which was received by SI Nirmal Singh (PW39), SHO, Police Station City, Hoshiarpur, FIR (Ex.PXXX) was recorded for kidnapping of a child from a place near `Shimla Pahari. SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43) of CIA Staff, Hoshiarpur also received information and instruction known as `questy about kidnapping of the boy, which activated the police machinery. The same day, father of the kidnapped child Ravi Verma (PW27) also received a call on his telephone number 226059 installed in the name of his father in his shop at 12.00 AM informing him that his son has been kidnapped and in case he wanted his son to return alive, he should make arrangement for payment of a ransom amount of Rs. 50.00 lacs. 50.00 lacs. When Ravi Verma (PW27) requested the caller that he be allowed to have access to his son over phone to have a talk with him first, he was told that his son was at some distance and he would be permitted to have talk with him later. However, the caller did not forget to reiterate the demand for immediate arrangement of Rs. 50.00 lacs while holding same threat regarding safe return of his son. The caller also told Mr. Verma that they would contact him again. Thereafter, Ravi Verma (PW27) went to DAV School where his son was studying and then came to know that his son had not reached the school on that day. Thus, on verification of that information, Ravi Verma (PW-27) became confident that his son has been kidnapped for money. After SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43) took over the investigation of the case, he went to Shimla Pahari Chowk situated in the area of Hoshiarpur City, where he met Ravi Verma (PW27), father of the kidnapped child, around 12.30 noon, and recorded his statement (Ex.PWWW). He made an endorsement (Ex.PWWW/1) on the statement, and the offence under Section 364 IPC was converted in to one under Section 364A IPC (kidnapping for ransom etc.), an aggravated form of offence. The I.O. directed Ravi Verma (PW27) to arrange an ID Caller with Tape Recorder and connect it with the telephone in his shop, and wait for further call of kidnappers so that they could be arrested. Ravi Verma (PW27) went to his shop after arranging ID caller equipment with tape recorder, which was connected with his telephone number 226059. It was only at 4.00 PM in the afternoon that he received a call on the telephone from mobile number 98147-83418 when the kidnapper asked him as to whether he made arrangement for ransom amount. Ravi Verma told that he was in the process of doing it. The kidnapper again did not fail to reiterate the earlier threat that in case Ravi Verma (PW27) wanted his son to be alive, then he should make arrangement for money immediately. Ravi Verma gave the same answer that he was in the process of arranging the money. Then the caller in a threatening tone told him that he should arrange the money forthwith in case he wanted his son to be alive. Ravi Verma gave the same answer that he was in the process of arranging the money. Then the caller in a threatening tone told him that he should arrange the money forthwith in case he wanted his son to be alive. Again at 7.00 PM in the evening, Ravi Verma (PW27) received a call from the kidnapper from the same mobile number, who asked him to open his mobile phone and talk. He thereafter received another call from the kidnapper on the same landline phone installed in his shop, who asked him as to why he had not switched on his mobile phone. Then witness Ravi Verma told the kidnapper that he was not carrying his mobile phone with him in the shop and that he had already sent a boy to his house for bringing it. Thereafter, the kidnapper abused him by using filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences saying that in case he took any panga causing them trouble, then they would take such panga that he would repent. The kidnapper further told him that the police had come to his house and the SSP had also come to meet him. Then Ravi Verma (PW27) told the kidnapper that he was not concerned with those matters and the SSP had not come to meet him. He told the kidnapper to disclose the place where he was to bring the ransom amount. The kidnapper told him that he would inform him the place on phone. Ravi Verma (PW27) again received a call from the kidnapper asking him to switch on mobile after going outside his shop. On mobile number 98726-44201 of Ravi Verma (PW27), the kidnapper told that there was clamour all over in the town and also warned him against indulging in any mischief. Ravi Verma then repeatedly assured him that he was not concerned with that activity and he only wanted his son to be back. The kidnapper, however, repeated the same threat but now in absolute clear terms that in case he played any mischief then he would not be able to see even the dead body of his son. Thereafter, Ravi Verma (PW27) being helpless kept on waiting for further call from the kidnappers, but such call was never received again after the last call had been made by them at 8.00 PM in the evening. Thereafter, Ravi Verma (PW27) being helpless kept on waiting for further call from the kidnappers, but such call was never received again after the last call had been made by them at 8.00 PM in the evening. Cassette (Ex.P25), of the conversation which was got recorded by Ravi Verma (PW27) through tape recorder connected with his telephone, was produced before SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43). The cassette was played on another tape recorder and the conversation between the complainant and the kidnapper was heard by the police. The cassette was made into a parcel, sealed with the seal `JK and then taken into possession vide Ex.PUU. During the course of investigation, it came to the notice of the police that one Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3), resident of U Enclave Bahadurpur, Hoshiarpur, while being inside his house at 7.15 AM on the date of kidnapping, heard the rings of call bell of his house. He saw that accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky, who was accompanying his wife (Mrs. Sharma) came into his bed room and touched his feet. Accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky being a friend of his son Mukul Sharma used to visit Mr. Sharmas house off and on. The accused told him that it was cold weather and in the morning hours he has come on motorcycle, therefore, he was feeling cold. He requested Naresh Kumar Sharma to give his car for some time for going to Jahankhelan. He (PW3) gave his Alto Car of miami colour (gray) bearing No. PB-07-M-5023 to the accused. The accused parked his motorcycle inside the house of Mr. Sharma and pushed off in the car. Mr. Sharma then went to attend his office in the bank, but at about 10.00 AM or 10.15 AM, when he enquired from his wife about his car, he was told that the accused had returned the car (Ex.P4) at about 10.00 AM, and taken back his motorcycle (Ex.P5). Statement of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) was recorded vide Ex.PA under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 21.2.2005 since his car was suspected to have been used in the commission of offence. Statement of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) was recorded vide Ex.PA under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 21.2.2005 since his car was suspected to have been used in the commission of offence. During investigation of the case, it also came to the notice of the police that on 14.2.2005 at about 8.40 AM in the morning, one Satish Kumar (PW19) having a shop known as New Delux Bakers and Confectioners situated at Shimla Pahari Chowk, Hoshiarpur, while standing outside his shop after opening its shutter, heard the noise like: `bachao bachao and then saw an Alto Car of silver gray colour (Ex.P4) without a number plate coming from the side of DAV School at a very high speed in which he also saw one foot of someone emerging outside the car, and that car moved towards Bahadurpur Chowk. The owner of shop Laxmi Steel situated opposite his shop informed the police about the incident from his (PW19) telephone which was installed in his shop. On the same day, i.e., 14.2.2005, one Amit Chohan (PW24), a relative of the complainant, having learnt about kidnapping of the child Abhi Verma at Kartarpur in T.V. news, decided to break his journey and return to Hoshiarpur from Kartarpur via Kishangarh and Adampur. While returning in his car, when he reached near village Daulatpur, just 300/400 yards ahead towards Adampur, he saw a Chevrolet Car of black colour lying parked near the road side in a direction facing Daulatpur and ahead of the cars one motorcycle of silver colour (Krizma -Ex.P5) was also standing parked. When he reached parallel to that car (Ex.P3), and while crossing it, he heard some whispering therein, in the car the next day, on 15.2.2005 he came to know that deceased Abhi Verma has been murdered, and his dead body was found lying in the fields of village Daulatpur. During the course of investigation, SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43) also met one Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) on 14.2.2005 at 11.15 PM and recorded his statement in Clock Tower Police Station City at 11.55 PM, the same day, who disclosed that one Alto Car of gray colour in which the kidnapped boy was made to sit was parked at about 8.30 AM in the morning in his locality. As he was standing near the main gate of his house in wait for the auto rickshaw to carry children of his relative, who had come to his house, to school, he noticed the car with a mark V in black colour standing nearby with its engine on. He also noticed that accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky was sitting on drivers seat and in the meantime, Abhi Verma, deceased child, came along with accused appellant Jasvir Singh. Accused Jasvir Singh sat on the back seat of the car and then Abhi Verma sat near him. At that time, the deceased was carrying a bag and wearing school uniform. Accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky drove away the car towards DAV School and that car was later identified as Ex.P4. A rough sketch of the place where from the minor boy had been kidnapped was prepared vide Ex.PDDD. Adding another link to the chain of circumstances in prosecution case, in the night of 14.2.2005 at about 10.00 PM, accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky was also seen going to Jalandhar on main road on his motorcycle (Ex.P5) while being followed by Chevrolet Car (Ex.P3) which was driven by accused appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jassa, and his wife co-accused appellant Sonia was noticed sitting on the front seat on the side of drivers seat. Accused Jasvir Singh was identified by Amit Jain (PW18). Manohar Lal (PW30) was also associated with investigation of the case. He was with police party headed by SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43). The police party encircled the kothi (house) owned by one Darshan Kaur (fathers sister of accused Jasvir Singh) situated in Mohalla Milap Nagar, Hoshiarpur. The main gate of that building was opened by a Constable after scaling the wall. The police party along with Manohar Lal (PW30), thus, went inside the drawing room of the kothi and saw accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh @ Jassa present there. Seeing the police, they tried to run away but they were over powered and arrested. The lights of the kothi were switched on. In the courtyard in rear side of the kothi, on opening back door of the drawing room, co-accused Sonia was seen burning some clothes after pouring alcohol in an iron bathal with the help of a match box. She was arrested with the help of a lady police constable. The lights of the kothi were switched on. In the courtyard in rear side of the kothi, on opening back door of the drawing room, co-accused Sonia was seen burning some clothes after pouring alcohol in an iron bathal with the help of a match box. She was arrested with the help of a lady police constable. The clothes which had been put on fire were, however, retrieved and recovered after putting out the fire. In the back side of courtyard of the house, one bathal (iron), one half burnt shirt of white colour, one half burnt pant of blue colour, one school bag having copies and books, one bottle of liquor mark Macdowl XXX Rum, and some burnt match sticks were found. On search of the first floor of that kothi, i.e., room on the garage, one pair of shoes of black colour, one belt, one iron karra, one blanket of double bed, one envelope of new spice quicky card, one sim-card- which after checking was found to have connection with Mobile Phone No. 98147-83418, some burnt match sticks and cigarette buds, one nylon string of blue colour of the length of 6-7 feet and one bottle of chloroform having batch No. N4-3379- 640 V with some contents were taken into possession vide memo (Ex.POO), after Finger prints expert (PW25) had completed his exercise of checking prints on these articles, and developed the finger prints lifted from the chloroform bottle. S.I. Kashmir Singh (PW-29) of FSL, Phillaur, was also summoned who took photographs of the prints developed from the impressions noticed on and lifted from chloroform bottle, and bottle of XXX Rum Macdowal No. 1 containing some quantity of rum. One motor cycle Krizma Hero Honda of Silver Grey colour bearing No. PB-07 Temp.P.-200 was standing which was taken into possession from the garage in the kothi. All the aforesaid articles were recovered vide Ex.POO on 15.2.2005. During interrogation of accused appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jassa, he suffered a disclosure statement that he and his wife Sonia and Vikram Singh @ Vicky have kept concealed the dead body after wrapping it in a bed sheet, which was carried in Chevrolet car No. B-08(T)-AL-1718 by placing the same in the dicky of the said car, in the field of Javi near village Daulatpur and they could get the same recovered by pointing out the place. His disclosure statement was reduced into writing vide Ex.PFFF. Accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky and co-accused appellant Sonia also made similar disclosure statements, which were reduced into writing vide Ex.PEEE and Ex.PDDD, respectively. Towards the disclosure statements suffered by the accused appellants, they led the police party to the specified place and got the recovery of naked dead body of deceased Abhi Verma wrapped in bed sheet effected from the southern side of the field of Javi crop. The dead body was taken into possession vide memo (Ex.PGGG). Photographer Harjinder Singh (PW10) was called, who took photographs of the dead body lying in field of Javi crop, 15 ft. away from the metalled road. After conducting inquest of the dead body vide report (Ex.PAAA), the dead body was sent for postmortem examination vide request letter (Ex.PXX) issued by Jiwan Kumar (PW43), through HC Om Parkash and Constable Jasbir Singh to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar. The accused persons also disclosed about concealing of Alto and Optra Chevrolet cars during interrogation. They led the police party to residence of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) of U Enclave, Bahadurpur, Hoshiarpur, where Alto car was parked under the porch. Finger Prints Expert Gurdip Singh (PW25) and Kashmir Singh (PW29), reached the kothi of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3). Gurdip Singh (PW25) developed finger prints by spraying power while Kashmir Singh (PW29) took photographs of the same. They examined Alto car (Ex.P4) and noticed some finger prints on looking mirror in front of drivers seat and some on back side number plate of the car. The police party then proceeded to katcha toba where one Chevrolet car (Ex.P3) was parked in front of house of one Subhash Kapoor. The Finger Prints Expert (PW25) examined the car and found presence of finger prints on backside looking mirror of driver side and dicky of the car. The impressions developed by the Finger Prints Expert (PW25) were photographed by SI Kashmira Singh (PW29), Photographer of the Finger Prints Bureau, Phillaur. Finger Prints Expert (PW25) handed over his report (Ex.PKK) to the I.O. for further necessary action. The I.O. (PW43) also searched the car. The impressions developed by the Finger Prints Expert (PW25) were photographed by SI Kashmira Singh (PW29), Photographer of the Finger Prints Bureau, Phillaur. Finger Prints Expert (PW25) handed over his report (Ex.PKK) to the I.O. for further necessary action. The I.O. (PW43) also searched the car. From the dash board of the Alto car, RC of car No. PB-07-M-5023 (Ex.P1) was recovered, and from underneath the adjoining seat on drivers side, one purse of black colour (Ex.P34) containing passport size photograph of Abhi Verma (Ex.P35), five photographs of religious Gurus, and a currency note of Rs. 50/- (Ex.P36), and two applications for grant of leave by Abhi Verma @ Harry (Ex.PDD and Ex.DE) were recovered and taken into possession by the police vide recovery memo (Ex.PLL). Rough site plan of the place of recovery of the Alto Car (Ex.PEEE) and a rough site plan with correct marginal note of place of occurrence and sites of recoveries in the kothi of Darshan Kaur (Ex.PFFF) were also prepared. Afterwards, a rough site plan of the place of recovery of the dead body as pointed out by the accused persons (Ex.PGGG) was also drawn. After recording of statements of witnesses, the accused led the police party alongwith finger prints experts to Mohalla Katcha Toba and got the car Optra Chevrolet (Ex.P-3) recovered from that area by pointing out. The car was taken into possession vide recovery memo (Ex.PMM) after examination of the same by the Finger Prints Experts. RC (Ex.P2) of the car was recovered from its dash board and the car was found to be registered in the name of accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky. On further search of the car, from underneath the drivers seat, one black colour pouch with label of Capital Bank (Ex.P44) containing visiting card of accused Jasvir Singh was recovered, and taken into possession. On the card, mobile No. 98159-50604 was written. From mat of the car and its dicky, soil along with kachra were lifted with the help of vacuum cleaner and recovered. The soil from mat was taken in a separate polythene bag; reduced into parcel, and sealed with seal `JK, while kachra (dust) from dicky alongwith dust bag of vacuum cleaner was put into another parcel and sealed with seal `JK after putting the same in paper envelope. The soil from mat was taken in a separate polythene bag; reduced into parcel, and sealed with seal `JK, while kachra (dust) from dicky alongwith dust bag of vacuum cleaner was put into another parcel and sealed with seal `JK after putting the same in paper envelope. The site plan (Ex.PXXXX) of the place of recovery with correct marginal note was prepared, and taken into possession vide separate memos (Ex.PHHH and Ex.PJJJ). These memos were duly attested and statements of witnesses were also recorded. The case properties were deposited intact with MHC Kewal Singh and before that, clothes of the deceased and other recovered articles like school bag etc. were got identified by witness Ravi Verma, father of the deceased. The accused were produced before concerned Area Judicial Magistrate, and were remanded to police custody. Arrests of the accused were effected vide arrest memos (Ex.PJJJJ, Ex.PJJJJ/1 and Ex.PJJJJ/2). Personal search of accused Vikram Singh, Jasvir Singh and Sonia was conducted vide search memos Ex.PJJJJ/3 to Ex.PJJJJ/5. From personal search of accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky, mobile phone Nokia-6600 (Ex.P45) with sim-card No. 98729-99442 and one mobile phone of Motorola make (Ex.46) with sim-card No. 98729- 99441 along with Rs. 25/- in cash were recovered. IMEI numbers of these phones were also noted down. From personal search of accused appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jassa, one mobile phone Motorola-350 bearing No. 98727- 12538 (Ex.P47) was recovered from front pocket of his shirt and Rs. 35/- from back pocket of pant and taken into possession vide memo (Ex.PJJJJ/4).As regards personal search of accused- appellant Sonia, vide recovery memo (Ex.PJJJJ/5), one machine made golden chain alongwith golden locket, two golden rings (one ring of small size and another of big size), one silver ring studded with stone, and one silver singhi in black thread were recovered and taken into possession. On 15.2.2005, postmortem examination on the dead body of deceased Abhi Verma @ Harry was conducted by Dr.(Mrs.) Gurinder Chawla (PW28) with a team of two other doctors. On an application (Ex.PXX), vide endorsement (Ex.PXX/1), Dr.Ranbir Singh formed a Medical Board consisting of Dr. Gurinder Chawla, Dr. K.S. Bawa, and Dr. Raman Gupta, to perform autopsy of the dead body of deceased Abhi Verma @ Harry. The dead body of deceased Abhi Verma was identified by Sanjiv Verma and Ram Lal Jaura. It was brought from the house of Darshan Kaur. Gurinder Chawla, Dr. K.S. Bawa, and Dr. Raman Gupta, to perform autopsy of the dead body of deceased Abhi Verma @ Harry. The dead body of deceased Abhi Verma was identified by Sanjiv Verma and Ram Lal Jaura. It was brought from the house of Darshan Kaur. Police papers were received at 2.05 PM on 15.2.2005, which contained the date and time of death as 1.30 AM on 15.2.2005. The postmortem was conducted at 2.30 PM on 15.2.2005. The Board of Doctors, as above, examined the dead body and conducted Post Mortem examination giving all necessary details in that regard, as contained in the evidence of Dr. Mrs. Gurinder Chawla (PW-28), as under : "The length of body was 180 cm. It was well built and well nourished body of a young male stained with mud all over, wearing gray coloured underwear, black socks, red cloth around the feet tightly tied with a blue coloured rope, black thread around the neck, 4 wide sticking plaster tightly bound over the mouth and extending all around the back of neck. Rigor mortis and postmortem staining were present. Both the nostrils were full of thick sticky material and mouth was full of vomitus. Oesophagus contained semi digested food. There was no ligature mark on the neck. Larynx and trachea were congested and contained fine frothy fluid. Face was suffused. Lips were swollen. Two pin point brown coloured marks on lateral side of right buttock. Injuries : 1. 3x2 cm abrasion over the right cheek, 2 cm from right nostril. 2. 0.75 x 1 cm abrasion just above the lip on the right side. 3. Reddish contusion around 7 mm (tie marks) present around both the wrists and ankles. 4. Multiple small abrasions were present on outer aspect of fingers of right hand. Meninges and brain were congested. Lungs were congested. On dissection of lungs, frothy blood fluid oozed out. Blood was present on both sides of heart. A piece of heart and lungs was sent for chemical examination in bottle No. I and sample of blood from heart was sent in bottle No. VI and the sample of preservative was sent in bottle No. V. Stomach and its contents were sent in bottle No. III. And loops of small and large intestines were sent in bottle No. IV and piece from liver, spleen and kidneys were sent in bottle No.II. And loops of small and large intestines were sent in bottle No. IV and piece from liver, spleen and kidneys were sent in bottle No.II. Bladder was found healthy and urine sample from bladder was sent for drug and chemical analysis in bottle No. VII. Organs of regeneration were found healthy. The opinion as to the cause of death in this case was deferred to await the report from the Chemical Examiner, Patiala. The time between death and postmortem examination was within 24 hours. I handed over to the police a sealed packet bearing four seals containing sticking plaster, red cloth, blue coloured nylone rope, black socks and a thread, duly signed. A copy of postmortem report No. MB 3/05 dated 15.2.2005 and seven police papers duly signed, a sealed envelope having four seals contain-opling a copy of postmortem report, forwarding letter to Chemical Examiner and police inquest papers seven in number, sealed box containing 16 seals containing viscera of the deceased for chemical examination, and a cloth piece containing sample seal bearing signatures of the doctors and particulars of the case. I have brought the original postmortem register containing original PMR of the deceased bearing my handwriting and signatures and the carbon copy of the same is Ex.PYY. Thereafter, I received the report of the Chemical Examination, copy of which is Ex.PZZ and after the report of the said report, the opinion for the death of the deceased was given as under: The cause of death in this case is chloroform and pentazocine poisoning. This opinion was given by me along with the members of the Board vide my endorsement (Ex.PZZ/1) on the report of the Chemical Examiner. It also bears the signatures of the members of the Board of Doctors. We all the doctors initialled the papers, which were brought along with the dead body including the inquest report and other documents. Ex.PAAA is the inquest report, which also bears my initials along with other doctors. Pentazocine is the chemical name and fortwin is the trade name. The maximum normal dose of fortwin is 0.5 ml to 1 ml. The fatal dose of pentazocine/fortwin is anything more than one ml. along with chloroform. Chloroform is not being used as an anaesthetic agent for surgical purposes because of its known toxicity." 3. Pentazocine is the chemical name and fortwin is the trade name. The maximum normal dose of fortwin is 0.5 ml to 1 ml. The fatal dose of pentazocine/fortwin is anything more than one ml. along with chloroform. Chloroform is not being used as an anaesthetic agent for surgical purposes because of its known toxicity." 3. During the course of investigation, the police not only recorded inculpating statements of prosecution witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C., but also produced some important witnesses like : (i) Naresh Kumar Sharma, (PW3); (ii) Anand Kumar Sood (PW4), and (iii) Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5) before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate for recording their statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Besides, the prosecution collected some further incriminating materials which are: (1) that the Alto car used in the offence was registered in the name of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW-1); (2) that Optra Chevrolet Car was sold to accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky on 26.2.2004; (3) that the accused persons purchased Chloroform on 11.2.2005 at 4.00 P.M.; (4) that on 11.2.2005, at about 11 a.m., in the morning, the accused also purchased 5 ampules of fortwin injection on a prescription from a veterinary doctor; (5) that the deceased was a student of Class 9th Section A in D.A.V. Higher Secondary School, Hoshiarpur and birth certificate is Ex.PF; (6) that the deceased was absent from the class on 14.2.2005 and also on 15.2.2005; (7) that the answer sheets recovered from the accused were in the handwriting of the deceased; (8) that the photographs produced in the Court were of the dead body of deceased which were taken on 15.2.2005; (9) that the spice Company office at Hoshiarpur had been given 10 connections which also included Sim- Card No. 98147-43418, to M/s Telecom Bullowel which in turn had sold the said Sim-card to accused Jasvir Singh; (10) that Manjit Singh (PW14) owned a shop in the name of M/s Telecom situated at Bullowel for sale of pre-paid activated recharge cards of Airtel and Spice companies and Jaswinder Singh (PW12) was having a dealership in prepaid Airtel Sim-Cards; (11) that on 14.2.2005, accused Jasvir Singh having come on a Krizma Motorcycle (Ex.P5) had purchased pre-activated cash card (Sim-Card) having No.98147-83418 with promise to supply proof of identification later on; (12) that Jaswinder Singh (PW12) also sold a prepaid connection (No. 98727-12538) on 10.7.2004 with other ten such connections to one Iqbal Singh (PW16), a dealer of Airtel connections and owner of Rajan Telecom and Rajan Karyana Store, Hoshiarpur, and PW16 sold the said connection to accused Jasvir Singh; (13) that accused Jasvir Singh was known to Iqbal Singh (PW16) from before and here again, he promised to supply his identification proof later on; (14) that two pre-paid connections bearing Nos. 98729-99441 and 98729-99442 were sold on 14.8.2004 to accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky on supply of identification proof (driving licence, ration card and photograph etc.), as per incriminating documents collected from Communication Solutions, Hoshiarpur, and Bharti Cellular Ltd., Mohali; (15) that one Krizma Motorcycle of gray colour was sold to accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky by DV Automobiles, Hoshiarpur, which was financed by HDFC Bank, Jalandhar; (16) that the telephone Nos. 226059, 227742, 220488, 227759 and 220788 were kept under observation as per a letter issued by SSP, Hoshiarpur, and the computerized print out of call details of said numbers particularly 226059 for 14.2.2005 and 15.2.2005 were supplied to the police; (17) that the call details of mobile phone No. 98147-83418 for the period 1.1.2005 to 20.2.2005 were also called for and received; (18) that the voice of accused Jasvir Singh was recorded by Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate and that cassette was taken into possession by the police; (19) that the accused persons suffered disclosure statements and pursuant thereto certain incriminating materials were recovered; (20) that the finger prints of the accused were taken which tallied with the prints lifted from various articles and developed by the experts; and (21) that the scaled site-plans of place of kidnapping, kothi of Darshan Kaur and the place of recovery of dead body were also prepared. 4. On completion of investigations, a challan was laid against the accused appellants, and having found prima facie incriminating materials, a charge- sheet was drawn under Sections 302, 364-A, 120-B and 201 IPC against all the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused appellants took the defence as : Accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky "I am innocent. I was called to the police station in the morning of 15.2.2005 and falsely implicated in the present case. Evidence regarding the finger prints, recovery of cell phones, recording of the voice and the recovery of different articles and disclosure statements was fabricated in order to strengthen the prosecution case." Accused Jasvir Singh "I was called from my village Meghowal Gajjain in the morning on 15.2.2005 along with my wife and falsely implicated in this case. I and my wife had gone to Amritsar on 11.2.2005 to consult Dr. Daljit Singh of Dr. Daljit Singh Eye Hospital at Amritsar. I and my wife had gone to Amritsar on 11.2.2005 to consult Dr. Daljit Singh of Dr. Daljit Singh Eye Hospital at Amritsar. I and my wife were not present throughout the day on 11.2.2005 at Hoshiarpur. My wife is an old patient of Dr. Daljit Singh and we had gone to consult him regarding her ailment. The police had fabricated evidence of finger prints on different articles in the police station. Similarly my voice was recorded in the police station and number of cassettes were prepared. Police had also recorded my voice on the tape recorder. No voice was tape recorded in the presence of the Tehsildar. The police has done all that before the Tehsildar reached the police station/CIA Staff. I am innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case." Accused Sonia "I was called from my village Meghowal Gajjain in the morning on 15.2.2005 along with my husband and falsely implicated in this case. I and my husband had gone to Amritsar on 11.2.2005 to consult Dr. Daljit Singh of Dr. Daljit Singh Eye Hospital at Amritsar. I and my husband were not present throughout the day on 11.2.2005 at Hoshiarpur. Myself is an old patient of Dr. Daljit Singh and we had gone to consult him regarding my ailment. The police had fabricated evidence of finger prints on different articles in the police station. Similarly the voice of my husband was recorded in the police station and number of cassettes were prepared. Police had also recorded his voice on the tape recorder. No voice was tape recorded in the presence of the Tehsildar. The police has done all that before the Tehsildar reached the CIA Staff. I am innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case." 5. Learned Sessions Judge during the trial of the case, formulated the following 6 points for determination : "i ) Whether the case is based on the statements of interested witnesses ? ii) Whether there are material discrepancies/contradictions in the prosecution case ? iii) Whether the investigation in this case was not conducted in a fair manner ? iv) Whether the plea of alibi is available to Sonia ? v) Whether defence version is more probable than the prosecution case ? vi) Whether the prosecution is able to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt ? 6. iii) Whether the investigation in this case was not conducted in a fair manner ? iv) Whether the plea of alibi is available to Sonia ? v) Whether defence version is more probable than the prosecution case ? vi) Whether the prosecution is able to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt ? 6. Learned Sessions Judge has dealt with the points raised during trial extensively and has rightly decided them against the accused persons. In addition to dealing with the aforesaid questions, learned Judge has summarised and enumerated the following 14 circumstances which he has found to be duly proved by the prosecution evidence: "a) Abhi Verma was a student studying in DAV School near Shimla Pahari Chowk, Hoshiarpur. He was 16 years of age and was the only son of Ravi Verma, PW-27, who is a goldsmith by profession. b) He went to the school early in the morning on 14.2.2005. An anonymous call was received by the police that some child has been kidnapped from the area of Shimla Pahari Chowk, Hoshiarpur. On that very day, Ravi Verma, PW-27 received a call on his telephone No. 226059 installed in his shop in Hoshiarpur City in the name of his father. The caller on the telephone told him that Abhi Verma his son has been kidnapped and he should make payment of Rs. 50 lacs as ransom amount in case he wanted his son to be alive and threat was also extended that the child would be eliminated in case the money is not paid to them immediately. That call on the telephone of the complainant was made from mobile telephone No. 98147-83418 by accused Jasvir Singh. The complainant contacted the police. As directed by the police, the complainant arranged ID caller apparatus with tape recorder and it was installed on the said telephone No. 226059 at his shop and in the evening around 4 PM, again call was received from the kidnappers from mobile No. 98147-83418 whether amount has been arranged or not and the kidnappers again threatened that in case he wanted his son to be alive, then he should arrange the money forthwith. Again around 7 PM, in the evening, call was received from that very mobile number of Jasvir Singh accused by the complainant. Again around 7 PM, in the evening, call was received from that very mobile number of Jasvir Singh accused by the complainant. The entire conversation was recorded in the cassette Ex.P.25 and the same was produced before the police and was taken into possession vide Ex.PUU. c) On 14.2.2005, Vikram Singh Walia accused had gone to the house of Naresh Kumar Sharma PW and borrowed Alto car from him at 7.15 A.M. and then he returned the same at around 10 A.M. on the same day. d) Early in the morning on 14.2.2005, at about 8.30 AM, Baljit Kumar Saini PW-13 saw the said Alto Car of grey colour, in which the kidnapped boy was made to sit. The said witness had also seen Vikram Singh accused sitting on the driver seat of the said car and in the meantime, Abhi Verma was seen coming alongwith Jasvir Singh accused. Jasvir Singh sat on the back seat of the driver of that Alto car and Abhi Verma also sat in the said car and Vikram Singh Walia accused drove the car towards DAV school. e) Around 8.40 AM, in the morning PW-19 Satish Kumar was standing outside his shop and he heard the cries of `save, save and then he saw Alto car of silver grey colour without number plate coming from the side of DAV school at a high speed, in which he saw one foot of some one, which had merged outside the car and the car went towards Bahadurpur chowk. f) On that very day, on the basis of secret information, police reached the Kothi of Darshan Kaur situated in Hoshiarpur and recovered the belongings and clothes of the kidnapped child alongwith his school bag etc. and all the three accused were found present there. Motorcycle Ex.P5 was also recovered in the garage of the said Kothi. Sonia accused was found trying to burn the belongings of the deceased. One envelope of quicky card, one sim-card were found to be of connection No. 98147- 83418, from which PW-27 Ravi Verma was receiving calls, which belongs to Jasvir Singh accused. g) Through disclosure statements, the accused disclosed the place where the dead body was lying and in pursuance thereof, the dead body of the deceased was recovered in the area of village Daulatpur. h) As per Dr. g) Through disclosure statements, the accused disclosed the place where the dead body was lying and in pursuance thereof, the dead body of the deceased was recovered in the area of village Daulatpur. h) As per Dr. (Mrs.) Gurinder Chawla, Medical Officer (PW-28), there were four injuries on the dead body of the child. The cause of death in this case is chloroform and pentazocine poisoning as per endorsement Ex.PZZ/1 on the basis of report of the Chemical Examiner. Ex.PAAA is the inquest report. Pentazocine is the chemical name and fortwin is the trade name. The maximum normal dose of fortwin is 0.5 ml to 1 ml. The fatal dose of pentazocine/fortwin is anything more than one ml. alongwith chloroform. Chloroform is not being used as an anesthetic agent for surgical purposes because of its known toxicity. i) On 11.2.2005, all the accused visited the shop of PW5 Bhanu Aggarwal and purchased five fortwin injections vide bill Ex.P- 9. On that very day, the accused went to the shop of Anand Kumar PW and purchased one bottle of 500 ml. of chloroform of Glaxo company vide bill Ex.P6 and the chloroform bottle purchased by them is Ex.P-8. j) Chevrolet car Ex.P.3 was purchased by Vikram Singh Walia accused. The Alto car No. PB-07-M-5023 Ex.P.4 was in the name of PW Naresh Kumar Sharma, while the motorcycle Ex.P.5 was purchased by accused Vikram Singh Walia. k) The accused suffered disclosure statements and got recovered Alto and Chevrolet cars, which were taken into possession by the police. The motorcycle was recovered from the kothi of Darshan Kaur. l) On 14.2.2005, around 10 PM at night, Vikram Singh Walia accused was seen coming on the main road going to Jalandhar, on motorcycle Ex.P.5 followed by Chevrolet car Ex.P.3, which was driven by Jasvir Singh accused and Sonia was also occupying the same and they were identified by PW-18 Amit Jain. m) On the intervening night of 14/15.2.2005, chevrolet car Ex.P.3 and motorcycle Ex.P.5 were seen parked in the area of Daulatpur on Adampur- Kartarpur road by Amit Chohan PW- 24. m) On the intervening night of 14/15.2.2005, chevrolet car Ex.P.3 and motorcycle Ex.P.5 were seen parked in the area of Daulatpur on Adampur- Kartarpur road by Amit Chohan PW- 24. n) On the basis of disclosure statement of accused Jasvir Singh Ex.PLLL, file empty ampules of Fortwin injunctions Ex.P-37 to P-41, one syringe Ex.P-42, one medical tape and one polythene bag were also recovered, which were taken into possession." In the end, learned trial Judge has ruled that each link in the chain of circumstances was individually and independently found to be proved and these circumstances also formed a complete chain giving no room for any hypothesis that the evidence on record is inconsistent with the guilt of the accused and consistent with their innocence. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Shri Vinod Ghai, learned counsel for the appellants, submitted that the Alto Car No. PB-07-M-5023 belonging to witness Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) which was used for kidnapping purpose, was given to accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky on his asking being a friend of Mukul Sharma, son of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3), for going to some place at 7.15 AM, but that Mukul Sharma was not examined and the car was returned to the owner without any delay only at 10.00 AM. There is no direct evidence to link the use of that car with kidnapping. This is also not clear from the evidence on record as to how it appeared in the newspaper that the deceased was kidnapped in the said car before that car could be recovered by the police. Learned counsel raised a suspicion and questioned as to why Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) was on leave for 6 days after the incident. According to him, during that period he would have been in police custody, and thus the police maneuvered the entire scene in order to fit him as a prosecution witness to prove that his car was used by the accused persons in kidnapping of the victim. This is also a submission of learned counsel that PW3 has admitted in his evidence that his son Mukul Sharma and accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky had never studied together, still, he claimed them to be good friends without giving any background of such relationship. This is also a submission of learned counsel that PW3 has admitted in his evidence that his son Mukul Sharma and accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky had never studied together, still, he claimed them to be good friends without giving any background of such relationship. Thus, there is no reliable evidence to prove a link between PW3 and accused appellant Vikram Singh @ Vicky. It looked unbelievable that this witness would have consulted his wife for whole day on the issue as to whether the police should be informed about use of his car by the accused in the incident and another witness Manohar Lal (PW30), a witness to recovery of that car (Ex.PLL) is an interested witness, being uncle of the complainant. There is no independent corroboration to the recovery of the car which was effected during day time at 3.45 PM. Thus, learned counsel submitted that PW3 is a procured witness, and he has appeared in witness box only in order to save his son. Learned counsel contended that, initially, the FIR was registered regarding an incident of kidnapping of a child under Section 364 IPC on receipt of a telephonic information by ASI Nirmal Singh (PW39) and that is why in the special report sent to ACJM, it is mentioned like that. The statement of father of the deceased was recorded at 1.20 PM on 14.2.2005 and though in the DDR recorded at 1.35 in respect of his statement, the factum of demand of ransom was mentioned, but, in the subsequent special report sent to the ACJM, Section 364A IPC was not added and in fact the offence under Section 364 IPC was converted into one under Section 364A IPC only after the arrest of the accused persons. This is also a submission of learned counsel that name of accused Sonia was not mentioned in the inquest proceedings and, it was only after the recovery of dead body that she was connected with the crime. According to learned counsel, though Sonia was shown to have been arrested at 8.00 AM, but names of only two accused were mentioned in the inquest proceedings conducted later at 1.30 PM. Moreover, the dead body was not recovered at the instance of accused Sonia. According to learned counsel, though Sonia was shown to have been arrested at 8.00 AM, but names of only two accused were mentioned in the inquest proceedings conducted later at 1.30 PM. Moreover, the dead body was not recovered at the instance of accused Sonia. Learned counsel argued that the prosecution has tried to establish that the chloroform, which was administered to make the boy unconscious was purchased from the shop of Anand Kumar (PW4) on 11.2.2005 at 4.00 PM, who has stated that all the three accused persons had come to his shop and asked for chloroform, however, no such disclosure statement was made by any of the accused persons regarding the purchase of chloroform. The bill shown to have been issued towards purchase of chloroform stands only in the name of accused Jasvir Singh. Another piece of incriminating evidence is the statement of Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5), who has stated that on 11.2.2005 at 11.00 AM, all the three accused persons had come and demanded 5 ampules of fortwin injection and the bill so issued is exhibited as Ex.P9. According to learned counsel, only after chloroform and ampules of fortwin injection were found during investigations that the police started investigation in that direction and again there was no such disclosure by any of the accused persons. As regards the circumstance of the last seen, witness Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) has been produced. He has stated to have seen the kidnappers at 8.30 AM on 14.2.2005, but he did not inform the police or even family of the victim, nor his explanation for such delay appears to be satisfactory. He did not produce any travelling ticket in support of his assertion that he had gone to Chintpurni on that day. His statement was recorded by the I.O. on 14.2.2005 at 11.55 PM in the night but again, there was no reference about him in the inquest proceedings of the dead body conducted on next day. Moreover, this witness has named only two accused persons, namely, Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh and has said nothing about accused Sonia. His statement was recorded by the I.O. on 14.2.2005 at 11.55 PM in the night but again, there was no reference about him in the inquest proceedings of the dead body conducted on next day. Moreover, this witness has named only two accused persons, namely, Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh and has said nothing about accused Sonia. Amit Jain (PW18) has claimed acquaintance with family of the deceased and has also claimed to have seen accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky going on a motorcycle and two other co-accused going in a black Chevrolet Car, but there is no explanation as to why he failed to inform family of the deceased or the police and rather he gave a statement only when called upon by the I.O. He also admitted that there was a divider in the middle of the road and, thus, according to learned counsel, it would not have been possible for him in that situation to see the accused persons who were going in their vehicles towards Jalandhar. Satish Kumar (PW19) had seen an Alto Car of silver gray colour coming from the side of DAV School at 8.30 AM at a very high speed but he has not stated as to who was driving that car. Amit Chohan (PW24) has stated to have seen a Chevrolet Car standing near village Daulatpur and heard some whispering while crossing it in his vehicle but he did not mention as to who were sitting in that car. This witness is related to the complainant as uncle, being husband of his fathers sister, and he was with the complainant throughout that night, but his statement was recorded only on next day (15.2.2005) at the place where the dead body was found lying. Further, surprisingly, his name was not mentioned in the inquest proceedings. Learned counsel also submitted that sim-card No. 9814783418 said to have been used by accused Jasvir Singh was not mentioned in the recovery memo (Ex.PVVV). During search of the car, the sim-card, which was alleged to have been used by accused Jasvir Singh, was recovered, but that was only the mobile number and not the sim-card number. Identification of the sim-card and mobile set on the basis of computerized recording as laid in evidence is also not scientifically proved. During search of the car, the sim-card, which was alleged to have been used by accused Jasvir Singh, was recovered, but that was only the mobile number and not the sim-card number. Identification of the sim-card and mobile set on the basis of computerized recording as laid in evidence is also not scientifically proved. Finger prints of the accused taken before an Executive Magistrate after their arrest to compare with the finger prints lifted from rear view mirror and number plate of Alto Car, and dicky and driver side rear view mirror of the Optra Chevrolet Car are not admissible in evidence. As regards recording of voice of accused Jasvir Singh to compare with voice recorded in the tape recorder connected with phone installed in the shop of Ravi Verma to prove demand of ransom, it was done on 18.2.2005, whereas, both the cassettes were sent on 22.2.2005 for comparison, which is supported only by the affidavit of HC Sarabjit Singh (Ex.PVVV), and there is no independent corroboration. As regards the recovery of dead body, accused Sonia is not shown in the recovery memo, she is also not mentioned in the inquest proceedings, and if at all, she is found to be connected with the offence, it was only in respect of destroying the evidence. SI Jaimal (DW3) and ASI Jaspal Singh (DW4) have appeared to say that wireless messages about the recovery of the dead body were flashed but without any explanation, the said messages of 14.2.2005 and 15.2.2005 were destroyed. As regards the recovery of articles belonging to the deceased from the possession of accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky, only a gold ring of the deceased has been shown to be recovered. Moreover, in her testimony, Dr. Gurinder Chawla (PW28) has stated that she noticed two pin point brown colour marks on lateral side of the right buttock which is normally a site of injection, but in the PMR the said marks were not mentioned by the Doctors. 8. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General, Shri Jattana, submitted that the complicity of co-accused Sonia w/o Jasvir Singh is evident from the fact that on 11.2.2005, she accompanied the two co-accused persons to the shops of PW4 and PW5 to purchase chemicals; she participated in the offence in a pre-planning and being an educated and working lady she was the brain behind the occurrence. She was noticed going in a black Chevrolet Car from Hoshiarpur to Jalandhar on 14.2.2005 at 10.00 p.m., by Amit Jain (PW18) and that car was seen standing near village Daulatpur by Amit Chauhan (PW24). She was arrested with co-accused persons when she was trying to destroy articles belonging to the deceased boy and other incriminating materials connected with the case. She was produced before the concerned Judicial Magistrate alongwith co-accused persons, the same day, therefore, she was not implicated later in the case. At the time of arrest, she was found burning the clothes of the deceased. She also made disclosure statement about the status of dead body of the deceased being wrapped in a bed-sheet and that the dead body was recovered in that condition pursuant to her statement. She was teacher in the school where the child was earlier studying. She had joint accounts with co-accused Vikram Singh, although she was not related to him. As per the evidence of Baljeet Kumar (PW-13), accused Jasvir Singh took the deceased along and put him in Alto car, whereas, co-accused Vikram, who was already sitting on steering sped away the car. They had also removed the number plate of the car as is evident from the testimony of Satish Kumar (PW19), who had seen the car on 14.2.2005 at 8.40 a.m. At the time of arrest of the accused persons, clothes and other articles belonging to the victim child and chemicals and syringes used in the offence were also recovered from the possession of the accused persons. Finger prints of the accused persons on being compared by the experts were found to be present on both cars used by them in the offence. Accused Sonia was also seen sitting in black Chevrolet Car on front seat which her husband co-accused Jasvir Singh was driving, while accused Vikram was driving motorcycle. Sim-card purchased on the date of occurrence in order to contact the father of the deceased for ransom, was found to have been sold to accused Jasvir Singh and the said mobile was recovered on the disclosure statements of accused persons from the premises of Smt. Darshan Kaur, where the accused were arrested. While purchasing the sim- card, accused Jasvir Singh had not furnished the proof of his identity and promised that he would supply it lateron. While purchasing the sim- card, accused Jasvir Singh had not furnished the proof of his identity and promised that he would supply it lateron. Witness Manjit Singh, owner of the shop, who issued the sim-card, has stated in the Court that accused Jasvir Singh was known to him. Out of total 42 witnesses examined in the Court, 15 are public witnesses, and only two are said to be related to the complainant side. Moreover, the accused could not show any enmity with the complainant to falsely implicate them in this case. 9. On a careful analysis of the rival evidence and submissions, and different circumstances found to have been proved by learned Sessions Judge, we are of considered view that the impugned judgment does not call for any interference in appeal. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and in order to establish its case, as many as 43 witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution whereas the defence has produced 7. 10. Kulwant Kaur (PW1), a Clerk in the office of DTO, Hoshiarpur, was examined to prove that Alto Car PB-07-M-5023 was registered in the name of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3). Hitesh Bhardwaj (PW2) was produced to establish that Optra Chevrolet Car of black colour was sold to Vikram Singh Walia on 26.4.2004. Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) is the owner of Alto Car, which was borrowed by accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky on the date of occurrence and used in kidnapping of deceased Abhi Verma. Anand Kumar (PW4), owner of Scientific Sales Corporation, has stated that all three accused persons had come to his shop on 11.2.2005 at 4.00 PM and purchased chloroform, a bottle of 500 ml. of Glaxo company, vide bill No. 347 dated 11.2.2005. Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5), proprietor of Prem Medical Hall, also stated that all three accused had come to his shop on 11.2.2005 at about 11.00 AM, and produced a prescription from a Veterinary Doctor, and on that basis, purchased 5 ampules of Fortwin injection vide bill No. 1951 dated 11.2.2005. Arjan Khanna (PW6) is a Draftsman, who prepared a scaled site plan (Ex.PD) of house of Darshan Kaur situated in Milap Nagar, Hoshiarpur. He also prepared site plan (Ex.PE) of the place of recovery of dead body. Arjan Khanna (PW6) is a Draftsman, who prepared a scaled site plan (Ex.PD) of house of Darshan Kaur situated in Milap Nagar, Hoshiarpur. He also prepared site plan (Ex.PE) of the place of recovery of dead body. Shiv Pal Singh (PW7),Principal of DAV Higher Secondary School, Hoshiarpur, produced admission register of the deceased boy and also proved that he was studying in Class IX-A. He further stated that the deceased was earlier studying in Saint Soldier School, Hoshiarpur. He also stated that answer sheets recovered from the place of occurrence from the bag of deceased were of his school. Kulwinder Kaur (PW8) was the Incharge Teacher of Class IX-A. She brought the attendance register to prove that on 14.2.2005, the deceased was absent from his class. Raj Pal (PW9) was the Mathematics Teacher of the deceased, and he identified the handwritings of deceased on answer sheets. Harjinder Singh (PW10) took photographs of the dead body on 15.2.2005 at about 9.30 AM. Tarlochan Singh (PW11) was a distributor of Spice Telecom. He produced the original challan (Ex.PL) regarding purchase of sim-card 98147-83418 used by accused Jasvir Singh in demanding ransom amount. It was a pre-paid sim-card of Spice Company which was sold to Manjit Singh (PW14), owner of M/s Telecom. Jaswinder Singh (PW12) was a dealer of pre-paid Airtel sim-cards. He produced the records relating to pre-paid connection No. 98727- 12538 dated 10.7.2004. He sold the said connection with other connections to one Iqbal Singh, Proprietor of Rajan Telecom. Baljeet Kumar Saini (PW13) had seen the kidnapping of the deceased in Alto Car by accused Jasvir Singh and Vikram Singh @ Vicky. Manjit Singh (PW14), owner of M/s Telecom, stated that on 14.2.2005, accused Jasvir Singh had come to his shop and purchased pre- activated card of Spice Company with No. 98147-83418. Rohit Khullar (PW15), owner of a shop known as Communication Solutions, used to sell post paid connections of Airtel company. He had sold two post paid connections bearing Nos. 98729- 99441 and 98729-99442 on 14.8.2004 to accused Vikram Singh. Iqbal Singh (PW16), owner of the shop `Rajan Telecom, has proved that he sold mobile phone No. 98727-12538 to accused Jasvir Singh on 10.7.2004. Kamalpret Singh (PW17), an Executive (Human Resources (HR), Bharti Cellular Limited), submitted records of incoming and outgoing calls of mobile telephone numbers 98728-12538, 98159-70604, 98729-99441, 98159-90604 and 98729-99442 from 1.1.2005 to 31.1.2005 and 1.2.2005 to 22.2.2005. Iqbal Singh (PW16), owner of the shop `Rajan Telecom, has proved that he sold mobile phone No. 98727-12538 to accused Jasvir Singh on 10.7.2004. Kamalpret Singh (PW17), an Executive (Human Resources (HR), Bharti Cellular Limited), submitted records of incoming and outgoing calls of mobile telephone numbers 98728-12538, 98159-70604, 98729-99441, 98159-90604 and 98729-99442 from 1.1.2005 to 31.1.2005 and 1.2.2005 to 22.2.2005. He produced the subscriber enrollment form of mobile Nos. 98729-99441 and 98729-99442. The first mobile phone was in the name of accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky whereas the second stood in the name of Parminder Kaur, his wife. Amit Jain (PW18) had seen the accused persons on 14.2.2005 at about 10.00 PM on Jalandhar road in motorcycle and a black Chevrolet Car. Satish Kumar (PW19), owner of Delux Backers and Confectioners, Shimla Pahari Chowk, on 14.2.2005 at about 8.40 in the morning, had seen Alto Car (Ex.P4) being driven at a very high speed, and also heard cries `Bachao, Bachao. Gaurav Vashisht (PW20), Manager of M/s DV Automobiles, proved that Krizma Motorcycle of silver gray colour was sold to accused Vikram Singh. Simarjit Singh (PW21), SDO, BSNL, Hoshiarpur, proved the computer print out of calls of telephone numbers 226059, 227742, 220488, 227759 and 220788. Vijay Kumar Sharma (PW22) is the Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate, before whom voice of accused Jasvir Singh was recorded in a cassette of tape recorder. Sarwan Singh (PW23), Municipal Councillor, Ward No. 19, stated that in his presence, voice of accused Jasvir Singh was recorded in the cassette by Vijay Kumar Sharma, Tehsildar. Amit Chohan (PW24), a Goldsmith and a relative of the complainant, had seen the black Chevrolet Car lying parked near road side and facing towards village Daulatpur, along with Krizma Motorcycle which was parked ahead of the car. Both the vehicles were found to have been used by the accused during commission of offence of disposing of dead body. He heard some whispering in the car when he had crossed it. Gurdip Singh (PW25), Finger Prints Expert, lifted finger prints from various places and articles. HC Mohinderjit Singh (PW26) was an Expert in the office of Finger Prints Bureau, SSP Office, Hoshiarpur. With permission of JMIC, Hoshiarpur, he took finger and palm prints of accused Jasvir Singh, Sonia and Vikram Singh @ Vicky. Ravi Kumar Verma (PW27) is father of the deceased boy. Dr. HC Mohinderjit Singh (PW26) was an Expert in the office of Finger Prints Bureau, SSP Office, Hoshiarpur. With permission of JMIC, Hoshiarpur, he took finger and palm prints of accused Jasvir Singh, Sonia and Vikram Singh @ Vicky. Ravi Kumar Verma (PW27) is father of the deceased boy. Dr. Gurinder Chawla (PW28) with a team of two other Doctors conducted postmortem examination on dead body of the deceased and appeared in Court to tender medical evidence. SI Kashmira Singh (PW29), Finger Prints Expert-cum-Photographer, Finger Prints Bureau, Phillaur, took photographs of finger prints available on bottles of XXX Rum and chloroform, and also on Alto and black Chevrolet Cars. Manohar Lal (PW30) is a uncle of the complainant being his fathers sisters husband. He was associated with investigation and recovery proceedings. HC Kewal Singh (PW31), MHC, tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex.PPPP). He produced register No. 19 containing details of articles deposited with him. HC Ravinder Nath (PW32) was handed over articles from police station on 21.2.2005 to deposit in FSL, Chandigarh, for chemical examination. He deposited the articles vide RC No. 85 on 21.2.2005 intact. Constable Yashpal (PW33) also submitted his evidence on affidavit (Ex.PRRR). He had delivered special report to Area Magistrate concerned. Constable Rajesh Kumar (PW34) in his evidence on affidavit (Ex.PSSS), also stated to have deposited some further incriminating articles in FSL, Chandigarh, for examination. CII Jasbir Singh (PW35) stated in his evidence vide affidavit (Ex.PTTT) that he carried the dead body of deceased for postmortem examination. HC Resham Singh (PW36) also submitted his evidence on affidavit (Ex.PUUU) and proved daily diary entry dated 15.2.2005 of CIA Staff, Hoshiarpur, showing that SI Jiwan Kumar had returned at 11.30 PM. HC Sarabjit Singh (PW37) who also tendered his evidence on affidavit (Ex.PVVV), had taken over the charge of malkhana on 22.2.2005 at about 12.30 PM and returned the charge on 23.2.2005 in afternoon. He stated that first consignment of case property was sent on 21.2.2005 and second on 22.2.2005 to FSL, Chandigarh. He also stated that all articles could not be sent together on 21.2.2005 as no other Constable was available and, therefore, the remainders were sent to FSL next day on 22.2.2005. A.S. Barda, JMIC, Hoshiarpur (PW38), on application vide Ex.PQQ, passed order (Ex.PQQ/1) whereby HC Mohinderjit Singh obtained finger prints and palm prints of the accused persons. He also stated that all articles could not be sent together on 21.2.2005 as no other Constable was available and, therefore, the remainders were sent to FSL next day on 22.2.2005. A.S. Barda, JMIC, Hoshiarpur (PW38), on application vide Ex.PQQ, passed order (Ex.PQQ/1) whereby HC Mohinderjit Singh obtained finger prints and palm prints of the accused persons. SI Nirmal Singh (PW39) was posted as ASI, Police Station City, Hoshiarpur, on 14.2.2005. At 8.45 AM, he had received a telephone call about kidnapping of a child from Shimla Pahari. He recorded FIR (Ex.PXXX) and has proved it. Saurabdeep Singh (PW40) was Executive, Regulatory Affairs, Spice Communication Pvt. Ltd. Mohali. He produced the call details of mobile phone No. 98147-83418 on a communication from Additional Director General of Police (Intelligence), Punjab. Inspector Surjit Singh Kandhali (PW41) was posted as SHO, PS Hariana. He partly investigated the case being a member of special investigation team. He has stated that on 14.2.2005, he had received a wireless message for holding a naka (check point) in connection with this case. DSP Naresh Kumar (PW42) interrogated accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky, who suffered disclosure statement (Ex.PKKK). Similarly, accused Jasvir Singh gave disclosure statement vide Ex.PLLL. He also prepared a rough site plan (Ex.PCCCC) of the place of recovery. He had made a request to SDM, Hoshiarpur, for deputing an Executive Magistrate to record voice of accused Jasvir Singh vide application (Ex.PFF). He has stated in his cross-examination that he had also interrogated accused Sonia. Pursuant to disclosure statements of the accused persons, some incriminating articles were recovered from kothi of Darshan Kaur. SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43) is the Investigating Officer. He has fully supported the investigation conducted by him. 11 Defence side has examined 7 witnesses. Dr. Daljit Singh (DW1) stated that he had operated upon right eye of accused Sonia on 13.5.2002 and left eye on 17.5.2002. As regards presence of accused Sonia and Jasvir Singh in Eye Hospital on 11.2.2005, in OPD records of the Hospital for 11.2.2005, name of accused Sonia is not entered. Moreover, offence in question was committed on 14.2.2005, and as such, these dates are not relevant for any defence plea, and thus, evidence of Dr. Daljit Singh (DW1) regarding alibi does not carry any weight. Moreover, offence in question was committed on 14.2.2005, and as such, these dates are not relevant for any defence plea, and thus, evidence of Dr. Daljit Singh (DW1) regarding alibi does not carry any weight. HC Parminder Lal (DW2) had been examined by the defence to prove that SI Jiwan Kumar of CIA Staff, Hoshiarpur, reached PS Adampur at 9.15 AM on 15.2.2005 only with accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh and not with accused Sonia, as per DD Entry No. 10, nor is she mentioned in police records of that date. SI Jaimal Singh (DW3) was examined to prove that a log book in respect of all wireless messages is maintained. However, log books for wireless messages of 14.2.2005 and 15.2.2005 were not made available because they were destroyed as per practice after a year or so. ASI Jaspal Singh (DW4) has also stated that log books about wireless messages are destroyed after a year. Vijay Bhuria (DW5), Junior Assistant, RTO Office, Dharamshala, was examined to contradict statement of Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) that he went to Mata Chintpurni on 14.2.2005 in the morning and came back in the night at about 10.15 PM. However, he only produced records containing time table of buses of Dharamshala region and not of buses of other regions. Sachinder Chowdhary (DW6), Senior Assistant of DTO Office Una, stated that private buses do operate during melas, sangrand and other festival days on special permits and their timings were not included in the time table brought by him. He has stated in cross-examination that : "The private buses do operate on melas, sangrand and other festival days on special permits. Those timings are not included in the time table brought by me. I cannot say about the timing of the departure of the buses from the starting station on the day of their operation i.e. As to whether they had left the starting point at the time mentioned in the time table or later on than that." Khushi Ram (DW7), Office Clerk, Dehra Friends Corporation Transport Society Private Limited, in his cross-examinations has also stated like : "Normally special permits are not granted to the private operators during festivals and sangrand etc. It is correct that on 14.2.2005, it was Basant Panchami but not Sangrand. Sangrand was on 12.2.2005. During Sangrand and Basant Panchami there is lot of rush in Chintpurni Mandir. It is correct that on 14.2.2005, it was Basant Panchami but not Sangrand. Sangrand was on 12.2.2005. During Sangrand and Basant Panchami there is lot of rush in Chintpurni Mandir. The bus can arrive late at the place of destination because of break down or traffic jam. I cannot tell that on 14.2.2005 the bus leaving Talwara at 2.40 PM had actually left Talwara at that time or not. Similarly, I cannot tell whether it had reached late at the place of destination and if so by what time. I have not brought the record regarding the departure and arrival of above said bus on 14.2.2005. I cannot say if the bus had left Talwara two hours after the scheduled departure time of 2.40 PM or it left Chintpurni after 7.00 PM and reached Hoshiarpur after 9.00 PM." Thus, he has admitted that 14.2.2005 was Basant Panchami day; there was a lot of rush and buses could not have maintained their time schedule. 12 Now coming to submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in view of testimonies of Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3), Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) and Satish Kumar (PW19), and Finger Prints Experts (PW25) and (PW29) noticing finger prints of the accused on Alto Car which was borrowed by accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky, its involvement in the offence is fully proved. There is no scope for conjectures and surmises as to why Mr. Sharma (PW3) was on leave for 6 days. Any respectable person who lends his vehicle in good faith to a family friend and later finds that it was misused in breach of faith for committing some serious offence would remain disturbed. Testimonies of related witnesses namely Manohar Lal (PW30) and Amit Chohan (PW24) cannot be disbelieved for some delay in giving statements to police or informing family members of the deceased. They would have been as relatives more interested in well being of the child than sharing their scattered knowledge with others. It would be true more particularly in the case of Amit Chohan (PW24) and a family friend Amit Jain (PW18). As regards bills of chloroform and fortwin, Anand Kumar (PW4) and Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5) produced the bills (Ex.P6 and Ex.P9) and thus a technical argument on small procedural defects, in view of clinching prosecution evidence on record, needs to be thwarted and is, as such, rejected. 13. As regards bills of chloroform and fortwin, Anand Kumar (PW4) and Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5) produced the bills (Ex.P6 and Ex.P9) and thus a technical argument on small procedural defects, in view of clinching prosecution evidence on record, needs to be thwarted and is, as such, rejected. 13. With reference to arguments on defective investigation, ignorance about some procedural compliance in investigations on the part of subordinate police officers, unless it is proved that a grave injustice has been caused to the accused or the police had a motive to falsely implicate them, can be ignored if there are enough incriminating materials on record against the accused. Defence plea concerning recovery of cars and motorcycle, in view of ocular evidence of Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13), Satish Kumar (PW19) and Naresh Kumar Sharma (PW3) and recovery of cars pursuant to disclosure statements of the accused and traces of finger prints on their bodies, there is no ambiguity about use of these vehicles in commission of offence. 14. Submissions regarding absence of name of Sonia in FIR, inquest and police records of CIA dated 14.2.2005 showing that SI Jiwan Kumar had brought only accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh along, to police station are also not tenable in view of clear and firm testimonies of witnesses Anand Kumar (PW4), Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5) and Amit Jain (PW18) and for rejection of statement of Dr.Daljit Singh (DW1). That apart, recoveries of the incriminating articles when being burnt by accused Sonia and discovery and recovery of dead body of the deceased from the place specified by all three accused go to establish active participation of accused Sonia in the offence throughout, hence, she is found involved in all offences and not only in one under Section 201 IPC. 15. As to delay in sending blood stained articles and other incriminating materials to FSL, Chandigarh, for examination, HC Ravinder Nath (PW32), and Constable Rajesh Kumar (PW34) stated that the said articles were deposited intact in FSL. Further, MHC Kewal Singh (PW31) and HC Sarabjit Singh (PW37) have also stated that so long as case properties remained in their custody, they were not tampered by them, nor allowed to be tampered with by any one else. Even FSL and Chemical Examiners reports (Ex.PZZ, Ex.PNNNN, Ex.POOOO, Ex.PQQQQ, Ex.PRRRR, Ex.PSSSS and Ex.PTTTT) also indicate that sent articles were received with seals intact. Even FSL and Chemical Examiners reports (Ex.PZZ, Ex.PNNNN, Ex.POOOO, Ex.PQQQQ, Ex.PRRRR, Ex.PSSSS and Ex.PTTTT) also indicate that sent articles were received with seals intact. Thus, we do not notice any merit in the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for appellants so as to take a different view on these counts. 16. In the premises set out herein above, we now propose to discuss evidence on record in brief, being shorn of unnecessary details under the following heads : "(i) Ransom-motive for kidnapping; (ii) Last seen together; (iii) Mode and manner of commission of offence of murder; (iv) Relationship of accused persons inter-se and use of mobile phones as link evidence; (v) Recoveries, and (vi) Experts evidence." 17. As regards motive for commission of offence, it may not be needed in a case of direct evidence or where circumstantial evidence is good enough to substantiate the prosecution case. However, in Section 364A IPC, ransom being motive was subsequently added by Act No. 42 of 1993 in the offence of kidnapping punishable under Section 364 IPC which makes it distinct and graver in nature. In the instant case, Ravi Verma (PW27), father of the deceased, has stated that he is a Goldsmith having a shop in Dabi Bazar, Hoshiarpur. Around 12.00 in the noon on 14.2.2005, he received a telephone call on telephone No. 226059 installed in his fathers name in his shop informing him that his son has been kidnapped and if he wanted to see him alive, he should immediately arrange a ransom amount of Rs. 50,00,000/-. Thereafter, under instructions of the police, Ravi Verma connected an ID Caller with Tape Recorder with that telephone. Again at 4.00 PM, he received another call from one of the kidnappers from mobile No. 98147-83418 who enquired as to whether the ransom amount has been arranged and repeated the same threats that if he wanted his son to return alive, he should immediately make arrangement for ransom amount. Thereafter, at about 7.00 PM in the evening, he received a further call from the kidnapper from the same mobile number who asked Mr. Verma to open his mobile-set to have a talk. Thereafter, at about 7.00 PM in the evening, he received a further call from the kidnapper from the same mobile number who asked Mr. Verma to open his mobile-set to have a talk. A little thereafter, the kidnapper called him once again on the same land line asking him as to why he has not opened his mobile phone and then used filthy language threatening him that if he took any panga with them, then they would take such panga that he would repent in future. Kidnapper also told Mr. Verma that the police had come to his house and the SSP had also met him. When witness Verma asked to indicate the place where he would bring the ransom amount, then he was told that he would be informed about the place over telephone. Mr. Verma received yet another phone call from the kidnapper, now on his mobile set No. 98728-44201, asking him to come outside his shop. He was again told in a threatening tone by the kidnapper that there is a hue and cry all over in town and in case he tried to play any mischief, he would not be able to see even the dead body of his son. Mr. Verma, thereafter, kept on waiting for further calls from the kidnapper but after 8.00 PM he never received any more call. Tape-recorded conversation over telephone as recorded in a cassette was produced by witness Verma before SI Jiwan Kumar (PW43) and he has also withstood a rigorous cross-examination in that regard. Another witness Amit Jain (PW18) has stated in his cross- examination that it was only on next day of the occurrence that he came to know about the incident of kidnapping. He knew deceased Abhi Verma and his father Ravi Verma who is a Goldsmith, having a shop situated in Dabi Bazar, Hoshiarpur, personally. This witness is also a Goldsmith. Amit Chohan (PW24) who is also a Goldsmith is related to complainant Ravi Verma. He has mentioned that Ravi Verma is a Goldsmith. Vijay Kumar Sharma, (PW22), Tehsildar-cum- Executive Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, conducted proceedings of recording of voice of accused Jasvir Singh, who had allegedly demanded the ransom amount over telephone. This witness is also a Goldsmith. Amit Chohan (PW24) who is also a Goldsmith is related to complainant Ravi Verma. He has mentioned that Ravi Verma is a Goldsmith. Vijay Kumar Sharma, (PW22), Tehsildar-cum- Executive Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, conducted proceedings of recording of voice of accused Jasvir Singh, who had allegedly demanded the ransom amount over telephone. Voice of the accused as contained in cassette which was recorded in presence of Tehsildar and Executive Magistrate and the one as contained in cassette of tape recorder connected with land-line phone, on comparison by CFSL, Chandigarh, were found to be of the same person, vide report (Ex.PQQQQ). Thus, ransom amount of Rs. 50,00,000/-, being the motive, impelled the accused persons to commit the offence of kidnapping punishable under Section 364A IPC. Honble the Apex Court in the judgment reported in 2000(2) RCR(Criminal) 618 : AIR 2000 SCW 1798 (State of UP v. Babu Ram) while emphasizing the relevance of motive, particularly in cases of circumstantial evidence has held : "11. We are unable to concur with the legal proposition adumbrated in the impugned judgment that motive may not be very much material in cases depending on direct evidence whereas motive is material only when the case depends upon circumstantial evidence. There is no legal warrant for making such a hiatus in criminal cases as for the motive for committing the crime. Motive is a relevant factor in all criminal cases whether based on the testimony of eye- witnesses or circumstantial evidence. The question in this regard is whether a prosecution must fail because it failed to prove the motive or even whether inability to prove motive would weaken the prosecution to any perceptible limit. No doubt, if the prosecution proves the existence of a motive it would be well and good for it, particularly in a case depending on circumstantial evidence, for, such motive could then be counted as one of the circumstances. However, it cannot be forgotten that it is generally a difficult area for any prosecution to bring on record what was in the mind of the respondent. Even if the Investigating Officer would have succeeded in knowing it through interrogations that cannot be put in evidence by them due to the ban imposed by law." 18. However, it cannot be forgotten that it is generally a difficult area for any prosecution to bring on record what was in the mind of the respondent. Even if the Investigating Officer would have succeeded in knowing it through interrogations that cannot be put in evidence by them due to the ban imposed by law." 18. Regarding circumstance of last seen together, Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) has stated : "On 14.2.05 around at 8.30 AM in the morning I was standing near main gate of my house and was waiting for the rickshaw so that children are picked up for going to the school. A maruti car Alto of gray colour was found parked near that place. On the bonnet there was a mark in black colour of `V. The car was in starting position and Vikram Singh @ Vicky was sitting on the driver seat of that Alto car. In the meantime, I saw that Abhi Verma with whom I was having family relation who was a student of DAV School, Hoshiarpur, came along with Jasvir Singh. First of all, Jasvir Singh sat down on the back seat of the driver of that vehicle and then Abhi Verma also sat in that car along with Jasvir Singh. Abhi Verma was carrying a bag with him, and he was in school dress and the car with those persons went towards DAV School....." 19. The witness has answered defence suggestions in cross-examinations as : "The a Alto car was parked on the other side of the road from my house. The Alto car was having a film on the glasses/window panes. The film was of black colour. DAV School is situated 1-1/2 km. from my house. The children to whom I was to see off at the main gate of my house, were neither my children nor were my grand children but they were the children of my wifes niece. Those children are studying in Vidya Mandir. Those children were not residing at my house. Those children are living with their parents in Hari Nagar, Hoshiarpur. Hari Nagar is at a distance of half km. from my house. Vol. it was Sunday and the children had come on the night of Saturday to live at my house. Mother alone had come with said children to live at my house on Saturday and whole of the Sunday they remained with us. Hari Nagar is at a distance of half km. from my house. Vol. it was Sunday and the children had come on the night of Saturday to live at my house. Mother alone had come with said children to live at my house on Saturday and whole of the Sunday they remained with us. One of those children is studying in 5th standard and the other is studying in the second standard......." As regards family relations with Vermas, in his further cross-examinations, the witness has stated : "I have family relations with Verma family for the last 25 years. I tried to give telephonic message to the parents of Abhi Verma, but the telephone continued to be engaged. The house of Abhi Verma is at a distance of 800/900 yards from my house........." 20. Another witness Satish Kumar (PW19) stated that he owned a bakers and confectioners shop at Shimla Pahari Chowk, Hoshiarpur. On 14.2.2005 at about 8.40 AM in the morning, he was standing outside his shop after opening shutter. Then he heard cries like: `Bachao Bachao and saw that an Alto car of silver gray colour, without number plate, came from the side of DAV School at a very high speed, from which one foot of some one was emerging outside and that car went towards Bahadurpur Chowk. There is a shop of Laxmi Steel opposite his shop. They informed the police from telephone line installed in his shop. He has also withstood rigorous cross-examinations. Relevant parts of evidence of Satish Kumar (PW19) on reproduction read as: "The name of shop is New Delux Bakers and Confectioners situated at Shimla Pahari Chowk, Hoshiarpur. On 14.2.05 around 8.40 AM in the morning, I was standing outside my shop after opening shutter of my shop. Then I heard `Bachao Bachao and then I saw an Alto car colour silver gray, without number plate, came from the side of DAV School at a very high speed, in which I saw that one foot of some one was emerged outside the car and that car went towards the Bahadurpur Chowk. There is a shop of Laxmi Steel opposite my shop. They informed the police from telephone lying installed in my shop. My statement was recorded when the police came. There is a shop of Laxmi Steel opposite my shop. They informed the police from telephone lying installed in my shop. My statement was recorded when the police came. I have seen the Alto car of silver gray colour (Ex.P4) and it is the same car." In his cross-examinations, he has stated as : "There are large number of Alto silver gray cars in Hoshiarpur. I have pointed out the car which is Ex.P4 outside the Court room to be the same as it is also of silver gray colour. It is wrong to suggest that Ex.P4 is not of silver gray colour but it is greenish in colour." 21. As regards mode and manner of commission of offence of murder, Anand Kumar (PW4), owner of Scientific Sales Corporation, has stated that all three accused came to his shop and purchased chloroform vide bill (Ex.P6). Also, from evidence of Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5), it is noticed that again all three accused came to his shop and purchased 5 ampules of fortwin injection, vide bills (Ex.P9 and P10) after showing a prescription of a Veterinary Doctor. From inquest report (Ex.PAAA), cause of death has been mentioned to be due to poisonous medicine or intoxicating injections or due to putting on tape on the mouth or suffocation etc. In Chemical Examiners report (Ex.PZZ), presence of chloroform and pentazocine were detected and as per evidence of the Doctor (PW28), cause of death was chloroform and pentazocine poisoning. Further, from possession of the accused persons, 5 ampules of fortwin injection, bottle of chloroform, and syringe with needle, tape etc. were recovered vide Ex.PNNN. Besides, when the dead body was recovered, both hands and legs of the deceased were found to be tied and mouth was closed with tape. 22. Regarding inter-se relationship of all three accused persons, it has come in the evidence of Baljit Kumar Saini (PW13) that accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky was running a computer centre and accused Jasvir Singh used to sit there. Relevant part of his evidence (cross-examination) on reproduction reads as : "I started learning computer again said I went to Computer Centre in May/June, 2004. Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky had run the Computer Centre for about 1-1/2 years. Prior to that, the said Computer Centre was being run by a small boy whose name I do not remember. Relevant part of his evidence (cross-examination) on reproduction reads as : "I started learning computer again said I went to Computer Centre in May/June, 2004. Vikramjit Singh @ Vicky had run the Computer Centre for about 1-1/2 years. Prior to that, the said Computer Centre was being run by a small boy whose name I do not remember. I went to enquire from the Computer Centre in May/June, 2004. I did not start learning at that time as Vicky told me that he has not deputed any tutor for giving lesson in computer. There was no other employee at that Computer Centre in those days. I do not know for what purpose Jasbir Singh used to sit at that Computer Centre. I do not know about the profession of Jasbir Singh. It is wrong to suggest that I had never gone to Computer Centre and that I am intentionally telling a lie about this." 23. All three accused persons went to shops of Anand Kumar (PW4) and Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5) and purchased chloroform and ampoules of fortwin. All three accused were noticed going towards Jalandhar by Amit Chohan (PW24). From evidence of Jaswinder Singh (PW12), a dealer of pre-paid sim-cards, it appears that he had sold 11 connections including pre-paid connection No. 98727-12538 dated 10.7.2004 vide Ex.PO to Iqbal Singh, proprietor of Rajan Telecom, Hoshiarpur. Iqbal Singh (PW16) stated that he is a dealer of Airtel connections and purchased cash cards for sale and out of them one pre-paid cash card number was 98727-12538, was later sold to Jasvir Singh @ Jassa, who was residing at Milap Nagar, Hoshiarpur. This witness was known to accused Jasvir Singh, who used to visit his shop. Jasvir Singh did not give proof of identification and assured to supply later-on as he appeared to in hurry. Iqbal Singh identified Jasvir Singh in Court. As regards mobile Nos. 98729- 99441 and 98729-99442, they were post-paid connections. Vide evidence of Kamalpreet Singh (PW17), mobile No. 98729-99441 was registered in the name of Vikram Singh @ Vicky while mobile No. 98729- 99442 stood in the name of his wife. He had furnished proof of identification. This witness also proved in- coming and out-going calls of these mobile numbers vide Ex.PQ, Ex.PR and Ex.PS. Vide evidence of Kamalpreet Singh (PW17), mobile No. 98729-99441 was registered in the name of Vikram Singh @ Vicky while mobile No. 98729- 99442 stood in the name of his wife. He had furnished proof of identification. This witness also proved in- coming and out-going calls of these mobile numbers vide Ex.PQ, Ex.PR and Ex.PS. This has come in evidence of another witness namely Rohit Khullar (PW15), owner of shop `Communication Solutions, that he had sold aforesaid two post-paid connections on 14.8.2004 to accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky. Thus, from evidence as aforesaid, it is clear that aforesaid connections stood in the names of accused persons and from the call details (Ex.PQ, Ex.PR and Ex.PS), being computerized data, they had been talking to each other. Besides, IO Jiwan Kumar (PW43) has stated that accused Vikram Singh and Sonia had joint account in a bank. In his statement, he has stated as : "Thereafter on 3.3.2005, Arun Walia father of accused Sonia produced before me passports of all the three accused and also the joint account of Sonia and Vikram Singh Walia No. 8490 dated 13.11.2001 in Shivalik Kashetria Gramin Bank, Model Town, Hoshiarpur, and I recorded the statement to this effect." Arun Walia was cited in list of prosecution witnesses but he was given up later-on, having been found to be won over by the accused persons. Moreover, he was not produced also by defence to contradict his version. Further at the time of police-raid of house of Darshan Kaur, situated in Milap Nagar, Hoshiarpur, all three accused were found present in the premises and on their disclosure statements, a large number of incriminating articles were recovered. On further disclosure statements given by all three accused persons, the dead body of deceased was recovered from a field of Javi crop near village Daulatpur. Thus, relationship of accused persons inter-se is found to be fully established. 24. With reference to various recoveries, all three vehicles namely Alto Car (Ex.P4), Chevrolet Car (Ex.P3) and Krizma Hero Honda Motorcycle (Ex.P5), used in the offence, were recovered on disclosure statements of the accused persons. In addition to that, pursuant to other disclosure statements of the accused, incriminating materials like belongings of deceased boy, chemicals used in poisoning him leading to his death, and dead body of deceased were recovered. In addition to that, pursuant to other disclosure statements of the accused, incriminating materials like belongings of deceased boy, chemicals used in poisoning him leading to his death, and dead body of deceased were recovered. Mobile phone used for demand of ransom and other mobile phones used for conversation among all three accused were also recovered. Bills of purchase of chemicals like chloroform and 5 ampoules of fortwin injection were produced and proved by Anand Kumar (PW4) and Bhanu Aggarwal (PW5). 25. So far as Experts evidence is concerned, a team of Doctors conducted postmortem examination of dead body and Dr. Gurinder Chawla (PW28) has proved postmortem report as also given medical evidence showing that death occurred due to chloroform and pentazocine poisoning. Chemical examination report of FSL, Punjab, Chandigarh, regarding presence of chloroform and pentazocine on viscera of dead body is Ex.PZZ. Relevant part of report on reproduction reads as : "Chloroform detected in the contents of Exs. I, II, III, IV and VI. Pentazocine detected in the contents of Exs.I, II, III, IV, VI and VI. No poison detected in the contents of Ex.V." 26. Other reports of FSL, Punjab, are Ex.PRRRR and Ex.PSSSS. In Ex.PRRRR, injection, ampoules and syringe with needle were found to contain active ingredients of fortwin injection whereas Ex.PSSSS showed the liquid under examination to be chloroform. Vide Ex.PNNNN, CFSL, Chandigarh, found soil samples recovered from foot mat of Chevrolet Car and the one collected from place of recovery of dead body to be similar. CFSL has given another report vide Ex.POOOO as : " Red colour in the exhibit A-1 was found to be similar to the exhibit-B in its thickness, density and colour." Vide Ex.PQQQQ, yet another report of CFSL, on auditory analysis of voice contained in audio cassette (Ex.1) and audio cassette (Ex.S), it was found to be of same person (accused Jasvir Singh). In addition to above, finger prints collected and developed by Finger Prints Experts Gurdip Singh (PW25) and Kashmira Singh (PW29) from mirror, dicky and name plate of cars on being tallied with finger prints of accused taken in presence of JMIC by Mohinderjit Singh (PW26) were found to tally with each other vide report (Ex.PTTTT). 27. In its various authoritative pronouncements, Honble the Apex Court has laid down law on circumstantial evidence. 27. In its various authoritative pronouncements, Honble the Apex Court has laid down law on circumstantial evidence. Some of such pronouncements are reported in (1) 1996(3) RCR(Criminal) 793 : 1996(10) SCC 193 (C. Chenga Reddy v. State of A.P.); (2) 1990(2) RCR(Criminal) 26 : AIR 1990 SC 79 (Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P.), and (3) AIR 1984 SC 1622 (Sharad Birdhi Chand Sharda v. State of Maharashtra), wherein the Honble Court has laid down guidelines for appreciation of circumstantial evidence as : (1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; (2) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; (3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probabilities the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and (4) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence. 28. We may also like to refer to the judgment of Honble the Apex Court reported in AIR 1973 SC 2407 (State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh), wherein the Honble Court has cautioned as how to strike balance between rights of accused and prosecution evidence during trial of a criminal case as follows : "A criminal trial is not like a fairy tale wherein one is free to give flight to ones imagination and phantasy. It concerns itself with the question as to whether the accused arraigned at the trial is guilty of the crime with which he is charged. Crime is an event in real life and is the product of inter-play of different human emotions. In arriving at the conclusion about the guilt of the accused charged with commission of a crime the Court has to judge the evidence by the yardstick of probabilities, its intrinsic worth and the animus of witnesses. Every case in the final analysis would have to depend upon its own facts. In arriving at the conclusion about the guilt of the accused charged with commission of a crime the Court has to judge the evidence by the yardstick of probabilities, its intrinsic worth and the animus of witnesses. Every case in the final analysis would have to depend upon its own facts. Although the benefit of every reasonable doubt should be given to the accused the Court should not at the same time reject evidence which is ex facie trustworthy on grounds which are fanciful or in the nature of conjectures." In the light of aforesaid observations of Honble the Apex Court, if we look at discussion of evidence on record led in the instant case as above, we notice that there are sufficient incriminating materials against accused persons to hold that the prosecution has successfully brought home the charges against them. 29. This is clearly proved that there was a demand of ransom which impelled kidnapping of the victim, a school going boy of 16 years, which constitute an offence under Section 364A IPC. As regards criminal conspiracy punishable under Section 120-B IPC, this is also found proved that all three accused persons had pre-planned and designed the kidnapping of boy for ransom which are founded upon telephonic conversations, purchase of chemicals together, presence of all three with incriminating materials in the house of Darshan Kaur and their disclosure statements, pursuant to which the dead body of deceased was recovered. So far as offence under Section 201 IPC is concerned, by wrapping the dead body in a bed-sheet and throwing it in a field of Javi crop near village Daulatpur, as revealed from disclosure statements of all three accused and further that accused Sonia was found to be destroying belongings of the deceased by burning them in an angithi, charges under Section 201 IPC on one count against accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh and on two counts against accused Sonia are found established. 30. 30. Thus, we are of considered view that each of the aforesaid circumstances, namely (i) Ransom-motive for kidnapping; (ii)Last seen together; (iii) Mode and manner of commission of offence of murder; (iv) Relationship of accused persons inter-se and use of mobile phones as link evidence; (v) Recoveries, and (vi) Experts evidence, is individually proved by preponderance of evidence, and at the same time, they also form a complete chain of circumstances to arrive at a conclusion that excludes every hypothesis which can be said to be consistent with innocence of the accused persons and inconsistent with their guilt. Under the circumstances, we hereby affirm the impugned judgment and order regarding conviction of the accused persons on all counts as charged with. Accordingly, Crl. Appeal No. 105-DB of 2007 is dismissed. 31. Now, coming to the question of confirmation of death sentence, learned counsel for appellants submitted that in obtaining facts and circumstances of this case all three accused being young in age and one of them being a lady deserve to be visited with a lenient view in awarding sentence as this case is based on circumstantial evidence. He also submitted that this is not a case where accused have acted in a diabolical manner that could shock the cumulative conscience of community. This is also not a case of brutal murder as is obvious from medical evidence and Chemical Examiners report which reveal that death was caused due to chloroform and pentazocine poisoning only. 32. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General for the State as also learned senior counsel for the complainant submitted that the deceased was an innocent school going boy of about 17 years and he was kidnapped and tortured to death in a pre-planned manner only for ransom. 33. On due consideration of rival submissions, we are of the view that Murder Reference No. 1 of 2007 deserves to be accepted and punishment of death sentence needs to be confirmed. 34. Honble the Apex Court in judgments reported in (1980)2 SCC 684 (Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab), and 1984(2) RCR(Criminal) 412 : (1983)3 SCC 470 (Machhi Singh and others v. State of Punjab), has laid down detailed guidelines to be followed before awarding death sentence in murder cases. 34. Honble the Apex Court in judgments reported in (1980)2 SCC 684 (Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab), and 1984(2) RCR(Criminal) 412 : (1983)3 SCC 470 (Machhi Singh and others v. State of Punjab), has laid down detailed guidelines to be followed before awarding death sentence in murder cases. In Machhi Singhs case (supra), it has been held as : "......When ingratitude is shown instead of gratitude by killing a member of the community which protects the murderer himself from being killed, or when the community feels that for the sake of self-preservation, the killer has to be killed, the community may well withdraw the protection by sanctioning the death penalty. But the community will not do so in every case. It may do so in rarest of rare cases when its collective conscience is so shocked that it will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise or retaining death penalty. ......." 35. The Honble Court thereafter encapsulated the circumstances which may help a Court in finding out and forming opinion as to whether a case of murder would fall in the category of the rarest of rare cases. The said circumstances are reproduced as : "I. Manner of commission of murder : When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting or dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community. For instance, (i) when the house of the victim is set aflame with the end in view to roast him alive in the house. (ii) when the victim is subjected to inhuman acts of torture or cruelty in order to bring about his or her death. (iii) when the body of the victim is cut into pieces or his body is dismembered in a fiendish manner. II. Motive for commission of murder : When the murder is committed for a motive which evinces total depravity and meanness. (iii) when the body of the victim is cut into pieces or his body is dismembered in a fiendish manner. II. Motive for commission of murder : When the murder is committed for a motive which evinces total depravity and meanness. For instance when (a) a hired assassin commits murder for the sake of money or reward (b) a cold blooded murder is committed with a deliberate design in order to inherit property or to gain control over property of a ward or a person under the control of the murderer or vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a dominating position or in a position of trust, or (c) a murder is committed in the course for betrayal of the motherland. III. Anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime : (a) When murder of a member of a Scheduled Caste or minority community etc., is committed not for personal reasons but in circumstances which arouse social wrath. For instance, when such a crime is committed in order to terrorize such persons and frighten them into fleeing from a place or in order to deprive them of, or make them surrender, lands or benefits conferred on them with a view to reverse past injustices and in order to restore the social balance. (b) In cases of bride burning and what are known as dowry deaths or when murder is committed in order to remarry for the sake of extracting dowry once again or to marry another woman on account of infatuation. IV. Magnitude of crime : When the crime is enormous in proportion. For instance when multiple murders say of all or almost all the members of a family or a large number of persons of a particular caste, community, or locality, are committed. V. Personality of victim of murder : When the victim of murder is (a) an innocent child who could not have or has not provided even an excuse, much less a provocation, for murder (b) a helpless woman or a person rendered helpless by old age or infirmity (c) when the victim is a person vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a position of domination or trust (d) when the victim is a public figure generally loved and respected by the community for the services rendered by him and the murder is committed for political or similar reasons other than personal reasons." 36. In this background, Honble the Apex Court culled out the guidelines from the discussions in the Constitution Bench judgment in Bachan Singhs case (supra), which are to be followed before awarding death sentence in a case of murder. The said guidelines are as : "(i) The extreme penalty of death need not be inflicted except in gravest cases of extreme culpability. (ii) Before opting for the death penalty the circumstances of the `offender are require to be taken into consideration alongwith the circumstances of `crime. (iii) Life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception. Death sentence must be imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime, and provided, and only provided, the option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all the relevant circumstances. (iv) A balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances has to be drawn up and in doing so, the mitigating circumstances has to be accorded full weightage and a just balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the mitigating circumstances before the option is exercised." 37. Further, in the judgment reported in 1986(1) RCR(Criminal) 513 : AIR 1985 SC 823 (Henry Westmuller Roberts etc. v. State of Assam etc.), Honble the Apex Court held as under : "The offence committed by the accused, the originator of the idea of kidnapping children of rich people for extracting ransom, are very heinous and pre-planned. In the instant case, the accused had been attempting to extract money from the unfortunate boys father, even after the boy had been murdered by making the father to believe that the boy was alive and would be returned to him if he paid the ransom. This is one of the rarest of rare cases in which the extreme penalty of death is called for for the murder of the innocent young boy, in cold blood after he had been kidnapped with promise to be given sweets. Therefore, the sentence of death awarded by the High Court has to be confirmed." 38. Moreover, in the judgment reported in AIR 1987 SC 1346 (Mahesh etc. Therefore, the sentence of death awarded by the High Court has to be confirmed." 38. Moreover, in the judgment reported in AIR 1987 SC 1346 (Mahesh etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh), Honble the Apex Court held as : "we feel that it will be a mockery of justice to permit these appellants to escape the extreme penalty of law when faced with such evidence and such cruel acts. To give the lesser punishment for the appellants would be to render the justicing system of this country suspect. The common man will lose faith in Courts. In such cases, he understands and appreciates the language of deterrence more than the reformative jargon. When we say this, we do not ignore the need for a reformative approach in the sentencing process. But here, we have no alternative but to confirm the death sentence. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal." 39. In a judgment reported in 1988(2) RCR(Criminal) 87 : AIR 1988 SC 672 (Ranjeet Singh and another v. State of Rajasthan), the Honble Court held that where a murder was predetermined and cold blooded and the act of accused was absolutely devilish and dastardly and innocent children were done to death with lethal weapons when they were fast asleep, sentence of death awarded cannot be said to be inappropriate. 40. In the instant case, from a careful reading of facts; minute analysis of evidence on records, and due consideration of rival submissions, we notice the following special reasons to hold that this case has acquired enormity of that kind which brings it in the rarest of rare category and for those reasons, we accept death reference and confirm death sentence: 1) This is a case that involves kidnapping of a school going innocent boy for ransom and from discussion on motive, as above, it appears that the accused had raised a demand of Rs. 50,00,000/- from father of the deceased boy who was an established jeweller of Hoshiarpur; 2) This has come in evidence of father of the deceased, Ravi Verma (PW27), that accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky was known to his family and thus, under that acquaintance, accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky and Jasvir Singh committed kidnapping of the boy while betraying his trust in them; 3) That all three accused-appellants committed offence of murder in a pre- planned manner by using scientific methods and injecting fatal dozes of chemicals in order to ensure that the offence was not detected and they were not fastened with criminal liability; 4) Right from pre-planning through death till recovery of dead body of the deceased, all three accused-appellants remained closely associated; 5) It appears that murder of the deceased was committed by administering chloroform and fortwin injections in heavy dozes after tying his both hands and legs and putting a tape on his mouth. Chloroform which was used to make the boy unconscious is now not given as anesthetic drug to any patient and fortwin is administered only in moderate dozes of 0.5 ml to 1 ml at a time after a gap of 8 hours. However, at the time of recovery of ampoules, each of 1 ml. quantity, all 5 ampoules were found to be empty. As such, the deceased was administered 5 ml. fortwin just within 24 hours apart from giving heavy dozes of chloroform. However, at the time of recovery of ampoules, each of 1 ml. quantity, all 5 ampoules were found to be empty. As such, the deceased was administered 5 ml. fortwin just within 24 hours apart from giving heavy dozes of chloroform. Thus, soon after kidnapping, the deceased was reduced to a corpus with the help of chemicals and he was done to death in inhuman, diabolical and dastardly manner; 6) The deceased was the only son of his parents and incident of his kidnapping had sent a shock wave throughout the town of Hoshiarpur and in adjacent areas and further, it also shocked the cumulative conscious of community causing hue and cry all over; 7) This is not a case of murder simplicitor but the accused persons have also been held guilty under Section 364-A IPC which was brought in statute book in order to curb the menace of kidnapping for ransom and even independent of penal provisions of Section 302 IPC, this Section also prescribes the punishment of death sentence in fit cases; and 8) This is not a case with even an iota of evidence to show enmity between parties, therefore, this is a case of cold blooded murder committed only in order to extract a heavy ransom of Rs. 50,00,000/- which is evident from evidence of Ravi Verma (PW27) father of the deceased that every time, while calling on phones, the kidnapper gave him threats that if he wanted his son to be alive, he should immediately arrange for ransom amount of Rs. 50,00,000/-. It appears as the police became active, the accused could not extract the ransom and out of panics poisoned the boy to death by administering heavy dozes of chloroform and fortwin. However, as accused Vikram Singh @ Vicky was known to the family and the boy had seen them, in all probabilities, the accused would not have spared his life in order to destroy evidence even in case of having received the ransom amount. Thus, from very beginning, the accused had kidnapped the boy for his elimination finally in either case (whether ransom amount was paid or not). In the premises discussed herein above, we accept Murder Reference No. 1 of 2007 and confirm the death sentence awarded by the trial Court. Resultantly, Crl. Appeal No. 105-DB of 2007 (Vikram Singh @ Vicky Walia and others v. State of Punjab) stands dismissed.