3
‘In reference (CRRFC-1 of 2017)’. Criminal Appeal No. 795 of 2017 was filed
by Om Prakash Yadav against the dismissal of Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2017.
4.
To establish its case, the prosecution had examined 17 witnesses
before the Trial Court and marked 45 exhibits. The defence examined 3
witnesses and adduced 14 exhibits in evidence.
5.
In brief, the prosecution’s case is as follows: Rajwant Kaur
(PW-
1), Ajit Pal’s mother, received a substantial sum of money upon sale of some
property by her father. This sale was effected on 22.03.2013 but prior to that, a
sum of ₹10 lakhs was received by her in cash. On the date of registration of
the sale deed, a sum of ₹27.5 lakhs was received by cheque, in the name of
her father. The balance amount was also received in cash on the same day.
Out of the ₹10 lakhs received by her, PW-1 created a fixed deposit for ₹9 lakhs
and ₹1 lakh was kept in her account. This information was in the knowledge of
Om Prakash Yadav, a neighbour, and his entire family. While so, on
26.03.2013, PW-1’s son, Ajit Pal, left the house at
9 o’clock in the night
to see the ‘Holika’ and did not return. PW-1 lodged a ‘missing person’ report
(Ex. P1) at Gorakhpur Police Station on 27.03.2013 at 16:15 hours. On
28.03.2013, PW-1’s brother, Amarjeet Singh @ Mitthu
(PW-2), and Om
Prakash Yadav went to the Gurudwara in Gwarighat to search for the boy. They
did not find him there but while they were returning, PW-2 received a call on
his mobile phone from mobile number 8305620342. The caller said - “I am
Khan speaking, Bobby is with me. Send me 50 lakh rupees.” PW-2 went to
選擇目標文字3
連接到段落
連接到實體
取消高亮顯示
新增到目錄