JUDGMENT P. V. HARDAS, J. :- The appellants, who stand convicted for an offence punishable under Section 364-A of IPC read with Section 3(1)(ii) of the MCOC Act read with Section 34 of IPC and under Section 3(2) of the MCOC Act read with Section 120-B of IPC and under Section 324, 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5 lakhs each in default of which to undergo further imprisonment for one year with no separate sentence being imposed against the appellants for offence punishable under Section 3(2) of the MCOC Act read with Section 120-B of IPC and 324, 326 read with Section 34 of IPC and in addition, appellant/original accused no. 3 in Criminal Appeal No. 495 of 2005 is convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 342 and 387 of IPC, however, no separate sentence being imposed against him for the said offence, by the Special Judge under the MCOC Act, Mumbai, by judgment dated 24/3/2005 in MCOC Special Case No.5 of 2004, by these appeals question the correctness of their conviction and sentence. 2. Criminal Appeal No, 462 of 2005 has been filed by original accused no.1. Criminal Appeal No. 495 of 2005 has been filed by original accused no.3. Criminal Appeal No. 564 of 2005 was filed by original accused no.2. However, since original accused no.2 was reported to have died, Criminal Appeal No. 564 of2005 was dismissed by us as abated against original accused no.2. 3. Facts in brief as are necessary for the decision of this appeal may briefly be stated thus: PW 38 - API Vijay Kadam, who, on 22/3/2004 was attached to the L.T. Marg Police Station, was directed by PW 41 - Vasant Tajne to record the statement of PW 7 - Premsingh. Accordingly, statement of PW 7 - Premsingh was recorded at Exh. 29. On the basis of the report of Premsingh at Exh. 29, an offence vide Crime No. 81 of 2004 was registered under Sections 364-A, 387 read with Section 34 of IPC by the L.T. Marg Police Station on 23/3/2004. Since the FIR was connected with the criminal gang of one Fazlu, the FIR was referred to the Crime Branch, Anti Extortion Cell. PW 38 -API Kadam had assisted PW 41- PI Tajne in the investigation of the said case. Since the FIR was connected with the criminal gang of one Fazlu, the FIR was referred to the Crime Branch, Anti Extortion Cell. PW 38 -API Kadam had assisted PW 41- PI Tajne in the investigation of the said case. On 25/3/ 2004, the suspect (accused no.1) Mohd. Irfan was called to the police station and on inquiry, it was found that he was involved in the offence. He was accordingly arrested on 25/3/ 2004 under arrest panchanama at Exh. 36. On his personal search, a Nokia mobile hand-set with sim card No.9869138516 was found in which numbers of Sameer, Firoz and other names were stored. In that phone, in front, No.B-8495053 was also mentioned. The voter's identity card with photograph and address, visiting cards and one chit were also found. Mobile numbers of some persons were mentioned on the said chit. A telephone diary was also found. The aforesaid articles were seized under the said panchanama at Exh. 36. On 26/3/2004, search of the house of accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan was conducted. During the search, passport was recovered and seized under panchanama at Exh. 16. During custodial interrogation on 28/3/2004, the confession of the accused was recorded at Exh. 38. The accused led the police and the panch and pointed out the place, where PW 4 - Alok was kidnapped. The accused then led the police and the panch to a building on the ground floor. On knocking the door of the ground floor flat, it was opened by one person, who was informed that the police intended to take the search of the house. The search of the flat was conducted, but nothing incrimination was found. Two mobile hand-sets were found with Mohd. Shafi (accused no.3), which had been Nos. 55401868 and 55442580, The address of accused no.3 at Pune was obtained and a panchanama at Exh.38 was drawn. During the period i.e. from 29/3/2004 to 31/4/2004, PW 38 - API Kadam along with other police staff had visited Pune in order to search the kidnapped victim - Alok. The call details were obtained from the telephone company at Exhs. 114 and 125. The call details had been furnished, pursuant to the communications addressed to the Managers of Reliance and Airtel Mobile Company at Exh. 115 and 116 respectively. Exh. 126 is the printout of the call details received from the Airtel Company. The call details were obtained from the telephone company at Exhs. 114 and 125. The call details had been furnished, pursuant to the communications addressed to the Managers of Reliance and Airtel Mobile Company at Exh. 115 and 116 respectively. Exh. 126 is the printout of the call details received from the Airtel Company. The provisions of the MCOC Act were applied and thereafter investigation was handed over to ACP Jadhe. PW 41 - PI Vasant Tajne, who was attached to the L.T. Marg Police Station and was working as PI, Crime, was investigating the aforesaid crime. It appears that on 14/3/2004, PW 39 - PSI Rahul Pagare recorded the missing complaint at Sr. No. 15/04 in the missing persons register regarding missing of Alok Bihani. The said complaint had been lodged by one Devilal Parikh. During the enquiry of the said missing complaint, PW 41 - PI Tajne had received two telephone numbers i.e. 9892401161 and 9892897751. Under the signature of the DCP letters were issued to the Airtel Company at Exh. 86, seeking details of the printout of the call details. The call details were received at Exh. 87. Alok Bihani was using a mobile phone No. 9892897751. On 22/3/2004, PW 7 - Premsingh approached PW 41 - PI Tajne and gave information about receiving threatening calls from one Fazlu for ransom and had also informed that the missing person Alok was in the custody of Fazlu. PW 41 - PI Tajne had accordingly directed PW 38 - API Kadam to record the statement of Premsingh and accordingly it was recorded at Exh. 29. The said complaint was forwarded to the Anti Extortion Cell, Crime Branch for investigation. A direction was received for registration of the offence at the L.T. Marg Police Station and accordingly an offence was registered at Crime No. 81 of 2004 under Section 364A, 387 read with Section 34 of IPC. The further investigation of the said crime was entrusted to PW 41 - PI Tajne. PI Tajne was assisted by PW 38 -API Kadam and PSI Gaikwad as well as PSI Rahul Pagare. On 25/3/2004, accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan was arrested under an arrest panchanama and articles in his possession were seized under panchanama at Exh. 36. Search of the house of accused no. 1 was conducted and accordingly a passport of the accused was seized under panchanama at Exh. 16. On 25/3/2004, accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan was arrested under an arrest panchanama and articles in his possession were seized under panchanama at Exh. 36. Search of the house of accused no. 1 was conducted and accordingly a passport of the accused was seized under panchanama at Exh. 16. The voluntary statement of the accused was recorded during custodial interrogation and accused no. 1 led the police and the panch to various places and search of the flat of accused no.3 was conducted. PW 41 - PI Tajne learnt that father of the victim by name Ramchandra was receiving threatening telephone calls at this native place in Doongargad, Rajasthan for release of ransom for releasing Alok. Accordingly, PSI Pagare was deputed to Doongargad in order to monitor the threatening calls. During custodial interrogation on 28/3/ 2004, accused no.1 expressed his desire to point out the place, where a revolver had been concealed by him. Accordingly, a memorandum was recorded in the presence of panchas at Exh. 142. Pursuant to the recording of the memorandum, the accused led the police and the panch to the office of BEST a Luggage at Kurla, Dharavi and from the first floor, produced a country made revolver, which was seized under seizure memo at Exh. 142-A. After returning to the police station, LAC Case was registered against accused no. 1 in respect of recovery of the country made revolver from his possession. On 4/4/2004, information was received from the father of the victim that the victim Alok had returned to his native place. Accordingly, PSI Pagare was sent to Rajasthan for recording the statement of Alok. On 9/4/ 2004, PSI Pagare returned back and handed over the statements of the witnesses recorded by him. PSI Pagare also handed over 18 photographs, two audio cassettes, negatives of the photographs, medical certificates etc. PW 38 - API Kadam was sent to Rajasthan with requisition letter to the Medical Officer for examination of PW 4 - Alok. Accordingly, PW 4 - Alok wad medically examined and a certificate was obtained. The said requisition is at Exh. 149. On 10/4/2004, PSI Pagare was sent to Bhiwandi for investigation and the clothes belonging to the victim PW 4 - Alok were seized under seizure memo at Exh. 137. On 15/4/2004, information was received from the Vishrantiwadi Police Station about arrest of accused no.2 - Firoz. The said requisition is at Exh. 149. On 10/4/2004, PSI Pagare was sent to Bhiwandi for investigation and the clothes belonging to the victim PW 4 - Alok were seized under seizure memo at Exh. 137. On 15/4/2004, information was received from the Vishrantiwadi Police Station about arrest of accused no.2 - Firoz. On 22/4/2004 PSI Gaikwad was sentto Pune for taking custody of accused no.2 - Firoz. On 27/4/2004, custody of accused no.2 - Firoz was received and he was brought to Mumbai. He was then arrested in the said crime and was referred for medical examination. The arrest panchanama from the Vishrantiwadi Police Station is at Exh.50. On 23/4/2004, PW 4 - Alok returned to Mumbai along with his father. PW 4 - Alok was referred tot he GJ. Hospital for medical check up and his further statement was recorded. During custodial interrogation, accused no.2 - Firoz expressed his willingness to point out the places where the victim had been detained. Accordingly, the memorandum was recorded in the presence of panchas at Exh.146. The panchanama of the places pointed out by the accused is at Exh. 146A. On 10/5/2004 accused no.3 Mohd. Shafi was arrested. On 8/6/2004, an application was moved before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 28th Court for permission to hold Test Identification Parade. Accordingly, Test Identification Parade was held and further statement of PW 4 - Alok, PW 5 - Vishal Thapa and PW 6 - Manish was recorded. Call details of the various mobile phones used by the accused were directed to be obtained from the concerned mobile companies. Exhs. 82 and 83 are the printouts in respect of Mobile Phone No. 9826027485. Exh. 97 is the printout in respect of Mobile Pone No. 9892897751 and 9892401161. Exhs.89 and 90 are the call details in respect of Mobile Phone No. 9892386973 and 9892973591. Exhs. 95 and 96 are the call details in respect of Mobile Phone No. 9892386973. Exhs.101 and 102 are the can details in respect of Tata Mobile Phone Nos.5540 1868 and 55442580. Exhs. 92 and 93 are the printouts in respect of Mobile Phone No.9892982604. Exhs. 109 and 110 are the printouts in respect of Mobile Phone No.9869138512. Exhs.116, 118, 119, 125 and 126 are call details in respect of the other mobile phone numbers. Statements of witnesses were corded. During the course of investigation, it transpired that accused no. Exhs. 92 and 93 are the printouts in respect of Mobile Phone No.9892982604. Exhs. 109 and 110 are the printouts in respect of Mobile Phone No.9869138512. Exhs.116, 118, 119, 125 and 126 are call details in respect of the other mobile phone numbers. Statements of witnesses were corded. During the course of investigation, it transpired that accused no. 2 - Firoz had formed an organized crime syndicate in association with the other gang members and, therefore, the charge-sheets filed against him were obtained and provisions of the MCOC Act were sought to be applied. After prior sanction, the provisions of MCOC Act were applied. The investigation was, thereafter, taken over by PW 43 - ACP Sharmrao Jadhe. PW 43 - ACP Jadhe was entrusted with the investigation after the application of the provisions of the MCOC Act. Accordingly, he interrogated the accused after obtaining their police custody remand from the court. Statements of witnesses were recorded and letters were addressed to the different mobile companies for collecting information regarding certain telephone numbers. A transcription of the tape recorded conversation at Exh. 31 was prepared. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was accordingly filed. The trial court vide Exh. 6 framed charge against the appellants and other accused for offence punishable under Section 3(4) of MCOC Act, 120-B of IPC read with Section 3(2) and Section 2(1)(a) of the MCOC Act, 364A of IPC read with Section 3(1)(ii) of the MCOC Act, 365, 368 read with Section 120-B or in the alternative Section 34 of IPC, 347, 344 and 342 of IPC read with Section 3(1)(ii) of the MCOC Act read with Section 120-B or in the alternative Section 34 of IPC, 387 read with Section 120-B of IPC and 3(1) (ii) of the MCOC Act read with 120-B of IPC or in the alternative Section 34 of IPC, 326 read with Section 34 or in the alternative 120-B of IPC and 324 read with Section 34 or in the alternative 120-B of IPC read with Section 3(1)(ii) of the MCOC Act. 3. The appellants denied their guilt and claimed to be tried. Prosecution, in support of its case, examined 44 witnesses. The trial court, upon appreciation of the evidence of the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the appellants and original accused no.2 as afore-stated. Original Accused No.1 and Original Accused No.3 have filed the present appeals. 3. The appellants denied their guilt and claimed to be tried. Prosecution, in support of its case, examined 44 witnesses. The trial court, upon appreciation of the evidence of the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the appellants and original accused no.2 as afore-stated. Original Accused No.1 and Original Accused No.3 have filed the present appeals. The appeal filed by Original Accused No.2, namely, Criminal Appeal No. 564 of 2005 was dismissed as abated on account of death of Original Accused No.2. 4. In order to effectively deal with the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel representing Original Accused No.1 and Original Accused No.3 and the learned APP, it would be useful to refer to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Since the entire prosecution revolves around the testimony of PW 4 Alok and PW 7 - Premsingh, we propose to deal with the evidence of these witnesses first. 5. PW 7 - Premsingh states that his mobile phone number was 9892386973 and his land-line phone number was 22080758. He states that PW 4 - Alok was residing with him in his room for about 20 days. The said room, where Premsingh was residing, was taken on rent by his employer - Babulal. Babulal was doing the business as a Courier in the name and style of "Ambika Couriers", having offices at Delhi, Calcutta and Mumbai. The Mumbai office was situated, where PW 7 - Premsingh was residing. Premsingh states that he used to sent parcels to Calcutta or Delhi and if any payment was to be recovered from any party, his employer used to gave the phone number of the party from whom the payment was- to be recovered. Premsingh states that on 13/3/2004 he had received a telephone call from one Raju at about 1.30 .m. Raju had informed him that he wanted to send Rs. 1,20,000/- to a party in Delhi. Premsingh enquired from said Raju as who had given him his telephone number. Raju informed him that the party, namely, Cassio Luggage and BESTO Luggage at Mahim had given the mobile number of Premisngh to him. Premsingh enquired from Raju regarding the place where the payment was to be received as Premsingh would send some person to receive the money. Raju informed Premsingh to send a person near the Kalpana Cinema Theater at Kurla, Mumbai. Premsingh enquired from Raju regarding the place where the payment was to be received as Premsingh would send some person to receive the money. Raju informed Premsingh to send a person near the Kalpana Cinema Theater at Kurla, Mumbai. Accordingly, PW 4 -Alok was sent at that place at about 4.30 p.m. After about 2 hours, Premsingh telephoned Alok on the mobile number, which was given to Alok, to enquire if Alok was reached near the Kalpana Theater. Alok had informed Premsingh that he would be reaching within 2 to 3 minutes. After some time, Premsingh again contacted Alok on the mobile phone, but the contact could not be established. Premsingh, therefore, telephoned on the mobile number of the person who had disclosed his name as Raju and whose telephone number was 9892401161, but the said mobile was switched off. Premsingh thereafter telephoned the Cassia Luggage and the BESTO Luggage to enquiry whether they had given the telephone number of Premsingh to a person, named Raju. Premsingh enquired from one Mansoorbhai of BESTO Luggage as to whether a person by name Irfan had given the mobile number of Premsingh to Raju. Premsingh was informed that Raju was not in the shop. Premsingh has identified accused no. 1 as the said Irfan. Since Alok had not returned till about 8.30 p.m., Premsingh and Devilal went near Kalpana Theater in order to search for Alok, but did not find him there. They had gone to the police chowky at the Kurla Railway Station to enquire as to whether there was any report of accident of a person by name Alok or whether Alok had .been arrested. Premsingh then telephoned the maternal uncle of Alok and enquire as to whether Alok had come to their house, but he replied in the negative. On 14/3/2004 when Premsingh was going to Bhyander to meet his friend Pavan and while Premsingh was near the Kandivali Station, he received a call on his mobile phone, who informed him that he wanted to talk to Premsingh in respect of a person and, therefore, Premsingh should come out of the station. After some time, Premsingh received a telephone call on his mobile and was informed that the man sent by Premsingh was in the custody of the caller. Premsingh enquired as to why the person was kept in the custody and where he was kept. After some time, Premsingh received a telephone call on his mobile and was informed that the man sent by Premsingh was in the custody of the caller. Premsingh enquired as to why the person was kept in the custody and where he was kept. The caller informed Premsingh that he wanted money. Premsingh enquired as to how much money he wanted and the caller informed him that he required One Crare. Premsingh accordingly informed him that Premsingh was poor and was employed and did not have so much money with him. The caller informed Premsingh that he would make a telephone call after about two hours and disconnected the telephone. Premsingh thereafter returned to Kalbadevi and went to the L.T. Marg Police Station and lodged the missing complaint of Alok. At about 9.30 p.m. he received another phone call and the caller informed him to talk with someone. Therson who had called earlier spoke to Premsingh and Premsingh heard the voice of Alok and Alok informed him that these people wanted money and thereafter the telephone was disconnected. Again at 10.30 p.m. Premsingh received a telephone call and the caller enquired whether Premsingh had gone to the police station. Premsingh was informed that a mobile phone was being tapped. Premsingh was asked to buy another sim card of different number and that number should be given to the caller. Accordingly, Premsingh purchased a new sim card and when he received the call from the kidnappers, he had informed his new number to them which was 9892973591. Premsingh thereafter received a call on the new number and was threatened not to inform the police, otherwise the kidnapped person would be killed. 6. On 15/3/2004 at about 4.30 p.m. Premsingh received another call on his mobile and was asked whether he was prepared to pay the money. Premsingh replied that he did not have the money. The called informed Premsingh that Premsingh must arrange for the money. Again at 9.30 p.m. Premsingh received another call and was told to arrange for the money, otherwise the abducted person would be killed. Such telephone calls were made to Premsingh for about four days. On 19/3/2004, father of Alok telephoned Premsingh from Rajasthan and also informed Premsingh that he had received telephone call from unknown person asking father of Alok to request Premsingh to pay the money. Such telephone calls were made to Premsingh for about four days. On 19/3/2004, father of Alok telephoned Premsingh from Rajasthan and also informed Premsingh that he had received telephone call from unknown person asking father of Alok to request Premsingh to pay the money. Alok had also spoken to his father requesting his father to save him, otherwise he would be killed. Ramchandra, father of Alok, informed Premsingh that the telephone number of the caller was displayed as "+ 10301". Premsingh received a call from a person who identified as Fazlu and had informed Premsingh that the boy had been killed and Premsingh was asked to keep the money with him. Another call was received from the said Fazlu who informed him to pay Rs.5 lakhs and get the boy released. Premsingh informed the caller that he had been informed that the boy had been killed and, therefore, why should Premsingh pay the money. The caller informed Premsingh that it was said only to threaten Premsingh. Premsingh was asked to arrange for the money on the next day. The number which was displayed on the mobile was "+10301". The call received by the maternal uncle of Alok at Rajasthan was from the phone no. 9415245515. 7. On 21/3/2004, Premsingh received a call from Fazlu and Premsingh spoke to Alok and thereafter the telephone was disconnected. On 22/3/2004 at about 2.15 p.m. Fazlu had telephoned Premsingh and had informed Premsingh that, that day was the last day and if money was not delivered, the boy would be killed. The phone number that was displayed was "+ 16600000". A similar message was also received by Premsingh on his mobile. Premsingh had accordingly gone to the police station and had lodged his report. According to Premsingh, he had given his mobile number to accused no.1 - Irfan about about 15 days prior to the incident. Premsingh further states that Irfan had also taken the visiting card and Irfan used to sit in the BESTO Luggage and Cassio Luggage shops and, therefore, Premsingh suspected the involvement of Irfan. 8. Premsingh has been extensively cross-examined. It has been suggested to Premsingh that he was indulging and doing the work of "Hawala" transaction. Premsingh has admitted that since there was a threat to kill Alok, he had not disclosed his new mobile number to the police. 8. Premsingh has been extensively cross-examined. It has been suggested to Premsingh that he was indulging and doing the work of "Hawala" transaction. Premsingh has admitted that since there was a threat to kill Alok, he had not disclosed his new mobile number to the police. He has admitted that the other employee - Devilal had accompanied him when he had gone to the police station. Premsingh has admitted that if there was a possibility of getting a new customer, he used to hand over the visiting card to the person requesting for the visiting card. He has admitted that he could not say as to how many persons he had given his visiting card. He has admitted that he had not given description of Irfan to police, but had given the address of BESTO Luggage and Cassio Luggage. He has denied the suggestion that he was a Hawala dealer and that Alok had been sent near the Kalpana Theater at Kurla for collecting money for Hawala transaction. In further cross-examination, he has admitted that Alok was not his employee. He has admitted that it is inadvertently stated in his report that Alok was his employee. In cross-examination on behalf of accused no.3, he has admitted that he does not know accused no.3 and had no business dealings with accused no.3. He has admitted that he was drawing salary of Rs.2500/. 9. We thus find that despite PW 7 - Premsingh being subjected to lengthy and a searching cross-examination, nothing of substance has been elicited in his cross-examination to doubt the veracity of what is stated by him. PW 7 - Premsingh, therefore, has emerged as a reliable witness. The evidence of PW 7 clearly establishes that Alok was sent near Kalpana Theater at Kurla for collecting money as was requested by one Raju. The evidence of PW 7 - Premsingh also establishes about receipt of telephone calls, making a demand for ransom for release of PW 4 - Alok. We thus find that the evidence of PW 7 Premsingh stands amply corroborated by First Information Report as well as by the evidence of PW 8 - Ramchandra, father of PW 4 - Alok. Even PW 8 - Ramchandra had received telephone calls, making a demand of ransom and was also asked to request PW 7 Premsingh to pay the amount of ransom. 10. Even PW 8 - Ramchandra had received telephone calls, making a demand of ransom and was also asked to request PW 7 Premsingh to pay the amount of ransom. 10. Prosecution has examined PW 4 - Alok, who had been abducted by the accused and for whose release a demand of ransom was made. Alok states that he had accompanied Premsingh to Bhiwandi along with his maternal uncle. He states that he had resided with PW 7 - Premsingh for about 20 days. On 12/3/2004, Premsingh had sent him to Kurla for receiving payment and accordingly he had received the payment on 12/3/2004. On 13/3/ 2004, he had been sent alone for receiving the payment from one party at Kurla. The spot was near Kalpana Theater, Kurla and he was to receive Rs. 1,20,000/- from one party. He had accordingly gone to Kurla and had been given one mobile by Premsingh for contacting the party. He states that the mobile number was 989289775. When he had gone near Kalpana Theater and waited for some time, he had received a call from the party. Alok responded as Premsingh as he was told to do by Premsingh. The party had assured him that someone would be sent at the spot. Accordingly, one auto-rickshaw came there and halted in front of Alok. In that auto-rickshaw, there were three persons, who were aged between 25 to 30 years. Those persons asked Alok to sit in the auto-rickshaw. Alok sat in the middle, while two persons sat besides him and the third person sat besides the driver. He states that a handkerchief was placed on his mouth and he lost consciousness. When he regained consciousness, he found that his mouth was gaged by a piece of cloth tied around his eyes and mouth. His hands and legs were also tied to the chair. After the cloth was removed from his eyes, he noticed about 3 to 4 persons. One of the persons had addressed him as Premsingh. Since his moth had been gaged, Alok by gesture tried to communicate that he was not Premsingh. Those persons started assaulting Alok by sticks and had also caused bum injuries by cigarettes. Those persons then questioned Alok as to whether he was Premsingh and when Alok replied in the negative, the persons started assaulting Alok again. Since his moth had been gaged, Alok by gesture tried to communicate that he was not Premsingh. Those persons started assaulting Alok by sticks and had also caused bum injuries by cigarettes. Those persons then questioned Alok as to whether he was Premsingh and when Alok replied in the negative, the persons started assaulting Alok again. Some medicine was given to Alok, which resulted in Alok loosing his consciousness. Alok states that those persons were same persons who had come in the auto-rickshaw. Alok further states that when he regain consciousness, he found that he was in the room which was a different room then the earlier room. Those persons came and removed the cloth around his eyes and had demanded the mobile number of his employer. Alok informed them that he did not know mobile number of his employer. The said persons then commenced assaulting Alok and also caused bum injuries by cigarettes. The assailants were speaking in Hindi as well as Urdu. A medicine was again administered to Alok, which resulted in Alok becoming unconscious. On regaining the consciousness, Alok noticed that he was alone in the room and at that time his hands and legs were untied. Gage around his mouth was also removed. He was on the 4th floor and, therefore, he tried to escape by descending with the help of the pipe. He had gone upto the third floor but because of the medicine, which was administered to him, he could not hold the pipe and lost his grip and fell down to the ground floor. He became unconscious again and when he regain consciousness, he found himself inside the room. At that time his mouth was gaged and his hands were also tied. The assailants entered the room and assaulted Alok again. He was again administered some medicine, which rendered him unconscious. Alok states that he had a talk with Premsingh at the instance of the assailants who had kept him in the room. The assailants had asked Alok to inform Premsingh to pay the ransom amount, otherwise Alok would be killed. Premsingh had assured Alok that he would pay the money and rescue him. Food was given to Alok and thereafter a medicine was again administered to him, which resulted in Alok loosing his consciousness. 11. The assailants had asked Alok to inform Premsingh to pay the ransom amount, otherwise Alok would be killed. Premsingh had assured Alok that he would pay the money and rescue him. Food was given to Alok and thereafter a medicine was again administered to him, which resulted in Alok loosing his consciousness. 11. The assailants had enquired about the residential phone number of the native place and when Alok had informed them that he did not know the same, the assailants had assaulted him and had dashed his head against wall and as a result of which Al ok had received injury on his eyebrow. Alok was asked to speak to his father and was asked to inform his father that unless money was paid, Alok would be killed. Alok states that he had informed his father to rescue him and to save him, otherwise Alok would be killed. Medicine was again administered to Alok, which resulted in his unconsciousness. Alok states that after regaining the consciousness, two persons had entered the room and he was asked to change his shirt and was rendered unconscious because of the medicine which was given to him. When he regain his consciousness, he noticed that he was travelling in a vehicle. Though his hands and legs were untied, two persons were sitting besides him and there was a piece of cloth covering his eyes. The vehicle was driven for about an hour and thereafter was stopped at one place. Some money was inserted in the shirt pocket of Alok and a bus ticket was also given to Alok. Alok was told to go to Rajasthan and not to alight at any other place, otherwise he would be shot. Alok sat in the bus and on enquiry from the co-passenger, learnt that he was at Kolhapur and the bus was going to Pune. Because of the drowsiness, Alok slept and was awakened by his co-passenger when they had reached Pune. At Pune, Alok noticed a bus going to Bhiwandi and accordingly boarded the bus and reached Bhiwandi at about 1 a.m. He went to he house of his maternal uncle - Suresh and narrated the entire incident to him. His maternal uncle gave him a change clothing and he talked to his parents on telephone. At Pune, Alok noticed a bus going to Bhiwandi and accordingly boarded the bus and reached Bhiwandi at about 1 a.m. He went to he house of his maternal uncle - Suresh and narrated the entire incident to him. His maternal uncle gave him a change clothing and he talked to his parents on telephone. He states that thereafter he, accompanied by his maternal uncle Mahesh, boarded a train for Rajasthan and reached his native place. He received medical treatment at the native place. Thereafter, police had come, his photographs were taken and his statement was recorded. He states that he had come from Rajasthan and was taken around various places where he was kept and he identified the places at Kurla and Mira-Road where he had been confined. He states that he had met a watchman, who used to give him water at the premises in the Mira Road. He had gone to the place at Pune, where he had been confined. He had accordingly identified the place. He has identified accused no.2 as the person in whose house he was confined. He has identified accused no. 1 as the person who had come in the auto-rickshaw and has also identified accused no.3 who had been talking to the accused who had confined him. He states that he had attended the Test Identification Parade and had identified the accused. 12. In cross-examination, he has admitted that he could not give the date when he passed his 12th standard examination. He has admitted that his father used to work as a commission agent at Calcutta. He has admitted that his first statement was recorded in Rajasthan. He has admitted that he does not recollect the exact date of recording of his statement. He has admitted that the police had recorded three statements during investigation. He has further admitted as correct that the three persons, who had come by auto-rickshaw on 13/3/2004 near Kalpana Theater had been seen by PW 4 - Alok for the first time on that day. He has further admitted that the persons enquired from him if he was Premsingh. He has also admitted that since those persons had assured the payment, Alok had boarded the auto-rickshaw. He has further admitted that the cloth was placed on his mouth and thereafter he became unconscious. He has further admitted that the persons enquired from him if he was Premsingh. He has also admitted that since those persons had assured the payment, Alok had boarded the auto-rickshaw. He has further admitted that the cloth was placed on his mouth and thereafter he became unconscious. An omission has been elicited that he had not stated in his statement dated 6/4/2004 that 3 to 4 persons had surrounded him when he had regained consciousness. He has admitted that the cigarette bums were given to him after his shirt had been removed by the offenders. He has also admitted that his pant was also removed by the offenders and then he was given cigarette bums. He had admitted that by gestures he conveyed to the offenders that he was not Premsingh. He has admitted that he had given description of the persons who had come in the auto-rickshaw near the Kalpana Talkies. He has admitted that he had not informed the police the complexions of the persons. He has admitted that one person used to come to the place of his confinement for giving water to Alok. Alok has admitted that he did not know his name. He was unable to state if his name was Vijay Thapa. He has further admitted that when he fell from the third floor he had not sustained any injury as he had slid down with the help of a pipe. According to him by clutching the pipe, he had slid from the third floor to the first floor and thereafter when his grip slipped, he fell from the first floor. He has admitted that it was incorrectly recorded in his statement that he had fallen from the third floor. An omission has been elicited that he had not stated in his previous statement that in the auto-rickshaw, he was made to sit in the middle, while two persons sat besides him. Alok was then questioned in respect of the placing of the cloth on his mouth. Alok has clarified that the cloth piece was placed on his nose. 13. In further cross-examination, he has admitted that he does not know about the business partners of Premsingh. Alok has admitted in further cross-examination that because he was apprehending danger, he had fled to his native place from Bhiwandi after the incident. An admission is elicited in the cross-examination that he had identified Mohd. 13. In further cross-examination, he has admitted that he does not know about the business partners of Premsingh. Alok has admitted in further cross-examination that because he was apprehending danger, he had fled to his native place from Bhiwandi after the incident. An admission is elicited in the cross-examination that he had identified Mohd. Shafti in the Test Identification Parade as he had seen him when the cloth from his eyes had been removed on certain occasions. 14. Prosecution has examined PW 2 - Khalil Ashpak Shaikh, a resident of Pune, who states that he was acquainted with accused no.1 - Firoz as he used to meet him in the Masjeed. PW 2 - Khalil further states that Firoz had taken flat on rent in the Sindhutara Apartments. He states that he had accompanied Firoz when he had gone for selecting the flat in the Sindhutara Apartments. 15. Prosecution has also examined PW 3 - Smt. ShahnazAli, who is the owner of the flat which was taken on rent by accused no. 2 - Firoz. Shahnaz further states that when she had gone to collect the rent, she had seen 2 to 3 other persons in the age group of about 22 years. She had also seen one person sitting there, who was crying. She has identified PW 4 as the same person who was seen in the flat and who was crying. 16. Prosecution has also examined PW 5 - Vishal Thapa, who states that he was working as a watchman. He further states that in Flat No. 402 in Arjun Building, "A" Wing, 4th Floor, the owner of the flat had brought four persons, who wanted to reside in the flat. This was some time in March, 2004. He has stated that he had seen the occupants of the flat using a Yama motorcycle. He has further stated that he used to serve water and on occasions had seen four occupants in the flat. He had also noticed a person who was aged about 20 to 22 years sitting in the flat. The person who was aged about 20 to 22 years and was wearing yellowish shirt had fallen on the ground floor from the first floor. He had descended with the help of the pipe to the first floor. He had also received an injury on his forehead. Due to the fall, he had received certain abrasions. The person who was aged about 20 to 22 years and was wearing yellowish shirt had fallen on the ground floor from the first floor. He had descended with the help of the pipe to the first floor. He had also received an injury on his forehead. Due to the fall, he had received certain abrasions. He has identified PW 4 -Alok as the person who had fallen from the first floor. He further states that he had identified accused no.2 - Firoz as the persons who was sitting in the said flat. 17. Prosecution has examined PW 11 - Jaffar Shaikh, the driver of the Qualis, who has identified accused nos. 2 and 3. Accused no.3 - Mohd. Shafi had hired the vehicle from PW 11 - Jaffar. PW 4 - Alok, after he was abducted, was confined in the house of accused no.3 for some time and was thereafter shifted to another house. The call details of the mobile companies indicate that accused nos.2 and 3 were in constant touch with each other. Admittedly, both accused nos.2 and 3 are said to be relatives and, therefore, telephone calls with each other would not necessarily establish any link. 18. Prosecution has also examined PW 23 - Sharad Vichare, the Special Executive Magistrate, who had conducted the Test Identification Parade. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have carefully examined the evidence relating to the conduct of the Test Identification Parade. We do not notice any infirmities of such magnitude as would entail the rejection of the evidence of the Test Identification Parade. 19. PW 4 - Alok was examined by PW 18 - Dr. Mane on 23/4/2004. PW 18 -- Dr. Mane had found that PW 4 - Alok had old burns scars all over the body due to cigarette bums. He states that PW 4 - Alok was apprehensive and was in a state of fear. The photo copy of the casualty register is at Exh. 56A, while the original casualty register was marked as Exh. 56. PW 4 - Alok was also examined by PW 19 - Dr. Nilesh Bihani on 23/4/2004. On being questioned, Alok had narrated the history that he had been kidnapped by unknown persons on 13/3/2004 and had also complained of bums caused by cigarettes. 56A, while the original casualty register was marked as Exh. 56. PW 4 - Alok was also examined by PW 19 - Dr. Nilesh Bihani on 23/4/2004. On being questioned, Alok had narrated the history that he had been kidnapped by unknown persons on 13/3/2004 and had also complained of bums caused by cigarettes. Alok was also complaining of palpitation and it was found that there was no abnormality in his cardio vascular system. PW 19 - Dr. Bihani, therefore, opined that palpitation was on account of pressure and anxiety. PW 4 -Alok was also examined by PW 20 - Dr. Anurang Verma, a Medical Officer working at the J. J. Hospital, Mumbai. He states that Alok had complained body-ache, injuries due to cigarette bums and was complaining of not able to sleep and having nightmares of the kidnapping incident. PW 20 - Dr. Verma states that he had accordingly prescribed certain meditations for Alok. The certificate is at Exh. 61. 20. The learned counsel for the appellants have urged before us that there is no evidence to indicate that the appellants were the persons who had allegedly abducted PW 4 - Alok. The learned counsel for the appellants, therefore, submit that the appeals deserve to be allowed and the accused deserve to be acquitted. The learned APP has supported the findings arrived at by the trial court. 21. PW 4 - Alok is a victim, who was in the company of his abductors. He has identified the abductors, who are the appellants in the appeals before us. Alok had numerous occasions to see his abductors as the cloth covering his eyes was removed on frequent occasions. We have no manner of doubt whatsoever that the prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt the involvement of the appellants and the abduction of PW 4 Alok. The learned counsel for the accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan has urged before us that according to PW 7 - Premsingh, accused no.1 was acquainted with him as PW 7 - Premsingh had given visiting card to accused no.1. The evidence of PW 4 - Alok indicates that the abductors were repeatedly asking him if he was Premsingh. It is, therefore, urged before us that this factor creates a doubt about involvement of accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan. The evidence of PW 4 - Alok indicates that the abductors were repeatedly asking him if he was Premsingh. It is, therefore, urged before us that this factor creates a doubt about involvement of accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan. It is no doubt true that PW 7 - Premsingh had said that he had met accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan and had handed over the visiting card of Premsingh to accused no.1. Merely because accused no. 1 may not be recollecting PW 7 - Premsingh and was repeatedly asking PW 4 -Alok if he was Premsingh, the involvement of the accused is not in any manner under a cloud. The testimony of PW 7 - Premsingh and particularly the testimony of PW 4 - Alok clearly establishes that it was accused no. 1 - Mohd. Irfan who had come in the auto-rickshaw. The evidence on record discloses that Alok had been taken to Pune. Accused No. 3 - Mohd. Shafi was instrumental in engaging a vehicle in which Alok was transported. The vehicle had been engaged from PW 11 - Jaffar. The evidence of PW -11 - Jaffar clearly establishes that his vehicle had been called by Mohd. Shafi near the Kalpana Theater at Kurla. The vehicle of PW 11 - Jaffar was taken from place to place and ultimately was taken to the Mira Road. He had entered the building i.e. flat on the fourth floor, where the three male persons in the vehicle had gone. He has also deposed about the vehicle being taken. He states about accused no.2 - Firoz also travelling in the vehicle. He has identified accused nos.2 and 3. Thus, the involvement of accused no.3 in the conspiracy to abduct PW 4 - Alok and to demand ransom has been clearly established. The accused, in our opinion, have been rightly convicted for the offences punishable under Section 364A of IPC and the under MCOC Act as well as under Sections 342 and 387 of the IPC. The accused had voluntarily caused hurt to PW 4 - Alok and consequently, have been rightly convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC. 22. The accused had voluntarily caused hurt to PW 4 - Alok and consequently, have been rightly convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC. 22. Learned counsel for the accused no.1 has placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Mehtab Alam Lalai Choudhari vs. State of Maharashtra [2013 (1) Crimes 291] : [2012 ALL MR (Cri) 3246]. In the said case, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that the prosecution had established that the minor had been kidnapped by the accused, but there was no evidence that the ransom note had been issued at the instance of the accused and, therefore, acquitted the accused under Section 364A of the IPC. The ratio of the aforesaid judgment is inapplicable to the facts of the present case. The abductors had abducted PW 4 - Alok and in his presence ransom was demanded from PW 7 - Premsingh. In the presence of PW 4 - Alok telephone calls were made to his father in Rajasthan and to him also demands were made to convince Premsingh to pay the ransom, failing which PW 4 - Alok would be killed. In the present case demand for ransom has been clearly established and, therefore, the ratio of the said judgment would not apply to the facts of the present case. 23. The learned counsel for accused no.3 - Mohd. Shafi has urged before us that the accused no.3, while in jail, has appeared for several examinations and, therefore, an opportunity of further learning be given to the accused by imposing lesser sentence. Accused No.3 has been rightly convicted by the trial court for the aforesaid offences. Since the accused no.3 has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 364A, no other sentence, than the sentence passed by the trial court, can be awarded to accused no.3. There is no scope for awarding a sentence lesser than the sentence of imprisonment for life. 24. Having, therefore, carefully considered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel for the appellants, according to us, the prosecution has proved the offence against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeals, therefore, filed by the appellants deserve to be dismissed. 25. 24. Having, therefore, carefully considered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsel for the appellants, according to us, the prosecution has proved the offence against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeals, therefore, filed by the appellants deserve to be dismissed. 25. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 462 of 2005 and Criminal Appeal No. 495 of 2005 are dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence of the appellants. Appeals dismissed.