# Kalloo v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2025) 5 ILRA 659
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-05-28
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 1585 of 1983
- **Bench:** Vivek Kumar Birla, Praveen Kumar Giri
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/kalloo-v-state-of-u-p-53433
- **Pages:** 21

## Headnote

660 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
A.G.A

(A)
Criminal
Law
-
Circumstantial
Evidence - Kidnapping and Murder of
minor child for ransom - Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 364 & 201 -
Appeal
against
conviction
-
Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 8, 27, 118 -
Evidence
re-scrutinized
and
reappreciated
-
Last
seen
evidence
-
Recovery of dead body and clothes at
instance of accused - Law relating to
competency
and
credibility
of
child
witness explained - Prompt lodging of
missing
report
and
FIR
enhancing
reliability - Motive not essential when
chain
of
circumstances
complete
-
Testimony of competent child witness can
form
sole
basis
of
conviction
-
Circumstantial evidence established chain
pointing to guilt of appellant - Conviction
can be based on complete chain of
circumstantial evidence leading to only
one inference of guilt - Where minor child
last seen with accused, who absconded,
and dead body/clothes recovered at his
instance,
conviction
sustainable
even
without proof of motive, if chain of
circumstances
complete
and
evidence
inspires confidence.(Para-3, 35 to 40,
45,46,)

Appellant, servant of complainant (PW-1),
enticed 8-year-old boy - on pretext of giving old
lottery tickets - boy last seen going towards
canal with accused - missing report lodged
same night - accused absconded - arrested next
day with two others - on his pointing out,
clothes recovered from bushes, dead body
recovered from pond - post-mortem revealed
death due to strangulation and drowning - two
co-accused acquitted for want of identification.
(Paras 4 to 14, 19, 23, 25, 33 to 34)

HELD:- Prosecution proved complete chain of
circumstances. Last seen evidence, recovery of
dead body and clothes at accused's instance,
post-conduct, and credible child witness left no
hypothesis except guilt. Co-accused acquitted
due to lack of identification. Conviction of
appellant (kalloo) under Section 302, 364, and
201 IPC upheld. (Para - 35,39,40)
Appeal dismissed. (E-7)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

_Characters 0–39,948 of 71,415. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39948 for what follows._

5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
659
Section 308 IPC to Section 304 IPC and the
documents in support thereof. P.W. 6-Dr
R.C. Prasad has proved the postmortem
report and the injuries shown by him in the
postmortem report. The evidence of P.W. 6
was questioned on the ground that the
lacerated wound was shown by the doctor in
his medical report dated 22.12.1999, whereas
blue mark was found by him but the learned
trial court found it at the same place where
the medical officer had found lacerated
wound and P.W. 6 after opening the same,
had also found the deposited blood. Thus, it is
only a matter of opinion and it may be on
account of fact that at the time of medical
examination on 22.12.1999, it was a fresh
injury and the postmortem was done after his
death on 24.12.1999, during which period it
cannot be said that the status of injury would
remain same and it might have been dried.
This Court does not find any legality or error
in the findings recorded by the learned trial
court.

18.
P.W.
7-Saffruddin,
who
investigated the matter after conversion of
case after death of Sonelal from Section
308 IPC to Section 304 IPC, proved the
conversion, statement of witnesses, inquest
report and arrest of the accused(s) on
31.12.1999 and filing of chargesheet after
investigation in accordance with law in the
matter.

19. In view of above and considering
the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, the contention of learned counsel for
the appellant, that the independent witness
P.W. 4-Rakesh @ Kalia has not proved the
incident, therefore, the appellants could not
have
been
convicted,
is
totally
misconceived and not tenable as the
incident has been proved by the P.W. 1 and
time and place of incident has been proved
by P.W. 4 also and it is also proved from
his evidence that at that time and place, the
deceased was injured and was lying in
injured condition, on account of which he
died subsequently. Thus, he supported the
evidence of P.W. 1. The learned trial court
has recorded finding after considering the
evidence and material on record in
accordance with law. The findings recorded
by the learned trial court does not suffer
from any illegality, error or perversity,
which may call for any interference by this
Court. The conviction and the punishment
awarded is also commensurate to the
charge, which has been proved by cogent
evidence. The appeal has been filed on
misconceived and baseless grounds.

20.
The
appeal
is,
accordingly,
dismissed
upholding
the
impugned
judgment and order passed by the trial
court.

21. Let a copy of this order along with
the records be sent back to the concerned
court forthwith for compliance.
----------
(2025) 5 ILRA 659
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.05.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J.
THE HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 1585 of 1983

Kalloo ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
K.N. Dwivedi,Kaustubh Tewari,Shrinath,Sri
Nath Dwivedi

Counsel for the Respondent:
660 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
A.G.A

(A)
Criminal
Law
-
Circumstantial
Evidence - Kidnapping and Murder of
minor child for ransom - Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 364 & 201 -
Appeal
against
conviction
-
Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 8, 27, 118 -
Evidence
re-scrutinized
and
reappreciated
-
Last
seen
evidence
-
Recovery of dead body and clothes at
instance of accused - Law relating to
competency
and
credibility
of
child
witness explained - Prompt lodging of
missing
report
and
FIR
enhancing
reliability - Motive not essential when
chain
of
circumstances
complete
-
Testimony of competent child witness can
form
sole
basis
of
conviction
-
Circumstantial evidence established chain
pointing to guilt of appellant - Conviction
can be based on complete chain of
circumstantial evidence leading to only
one inference of guilt - Where minor child
last seen with accused, who absconded,
and dead body/clothes recovered at his
instance,
conviction
sustainable
even
without proof of motive, if chain of
circumstances
complete
and
evidence
inspires confidence.(Para-3, 35 to 40,
45,46,)

Appellant, servant of complainant (PW-1),
enticed 8-year-old boy - on pretext of giving old
lottery tickets - boy last seen going towards
canal with accused - missing report lodged
same night - accused absconded - arrested next
day with two others - on his pointing out,
clothes recovered from bushes, dead body
recovered from pond - post-mortem revealed
death due to strangulation and drowning - two
co-accused acquitted for want of identification.
(Paras 4 to 14, 19, 23, 25, 33 to 34)

HELD:- Prosecution proved complete chain of
circumstances. Last seen evidence, recovery of
dead body and clothes at accused's instance,
post-conduct, and credible child witness left no
hypothesis except guilt. Co-accused acquitted
due to lack of identification. Conviction of
appellant (kalloo) under Section 302, 364, and
201 IPC upheld. (Para - 35,39,40)
Appeal dismissed. (E-7)

List of Cases cited:

1. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs St. of Maha.,
(1984) 4 SCC 116

2. Jai Prakash Singh Vs St. of Bihar & anr.,
(2012) 4 SCC 379

3. Dattu Ramrao Sakhare Vs St. of Maha. ,
(1997) 5 SCC 341

4. St. of M.P. Vs Balveer Singh, 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 390

5. A.N. Venkatesh Vs St. of Karn., (2005) 7 SCC
714

6. St. (NCT of Delhi) Vs Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan
Guru, (2005) 11 SCC 600

7. Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma Vs St. of
NCT Delhi, AIR 2010 SC 2352

8. Ashok Vs St. of Maha., 2015 (4) SCC 393

(Delivered by Hon'ble Praveen Kumar
Giri, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Sri Nath Dwivedi,
learned counsel for the appellant and Sri
Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A.-I for the
State and perused the record.

2. The above noted appeal has been
filed against the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 01.06.1983
passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge,
Kanpur in Sessions Trial No. 391 of 1982,
wherein, the Trial Court has convicted the
accused-appellant under Section 302 I.P.C.
for life imprisonment under Section 364
I.P.C.
for
seven
years
rigorous
imprisonment and under Section 201 I.P.C.
for five years rigorous imprisonment.

3. The Trial Court's record is received
and paper book is ready. With the
5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
661
assistance of learned counsel for the
parties, the entire evidence is re-scrutinized
and re-appreciated.

4. Prosecution story is that Sri Basant
Lal Gupta was residing in house No.69/196
Bhoosa Toli, Kanpur. His father Sri Anni
Lal Gupta lived in house No.61/196
Hoolaganj. Basant Lal Gupta had one son
Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias Deynee, one
daughter Km. Kalpana Gupta aged about
12 years and another younger daughter. On
23.7.1982, in the evening at about 5.00 or
5.30 P.M., Kalpana Gupta alias Dezi and
Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias Daynee had
gone to the house of their grandfather to
play. After they had gone, Basant Lal
Gupta, his wife and the younger daughter
went for an evening walk. Besant Lal
Gupta had one servant, namely, Kalloo
(accused). Kalloo remained at the house,
when all these persons left the house, he
had also left the house after Basant Lal
Gupta has gone out. At about 9:00 P.M.,
the younger brother of Basant Lal, namely,
Kamal, came from the house of his father
and enquired whether Daynee had returned
because he was not available at his
residence. Basant Lal Gupta also left the
house to search his son and when he also
could not get him he went at the police
station and lodged the missing report at 10
P.M. regarding the missing of Sudhir
Kumar Gupta alias Daynee.

5. On 23.07.1982, P.W.-1, Basant Lal
Gupta
(father)
had
given
written
information to the police that his 8 years
old child, Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias
Deynee was missing since 8 O'clock night
from his residence. The relevant portion of
missing report (Ex. Ka-1) is being quoted
below:

"तदनााँक 23-7-82

सेवा में,

श्रीमाि थािाध्यि

हरबंश मोहाल

िािपुर

मान्यवर महोदय,

किवेदि है कि हमारा लडिा सुधीर िुमार िुप्ता उम्र 8
विभ राकत्र 8 बजे ह लािंज िुडमण्डी से िही लापता हो िया है।
िृपया इसिी ररपोर्भ कलख ले तथा उकचत व्यवस्था िरें।

र्वदीय

वसंत लाल िुप्ता

69/115 र्ूसा र्ोली
िािपुर

तफसील लडका

उम्र 8 विभ

िद िार्ा

रंि सांवला

िपडे पहिे हुये हरा पैन्र् सफेn cq'kVZ छपी हुई

ए०आई / सी०ओ० पी०एस० हरवंश मो०

िृपया बाद तलाश ररपोर्भ दे।"

6. On 23.07.1982, at 22 O'clock, the
police of Police Station Harbans Mohal,
District Kanpur, made entry of missing
report in General Diary (GD) of Police
Station as G.D. No. 40, dated 23.07.1982,
time 22 O'clock. The relevant portion of
G.D. entry is being quoted herein below:

"bl le; claryky xqIrk 69@115 Hkwlk
Vksyh dkuiqj us gkftj Fkkuk vkdj ,d rgjhj nkf[ky
fd;k ckor xqe gks tkus yM+dk lq/kkhj dqekj udy
rgjhj lsok esa Fkkuk/;{k gjca'k eksgky Fkkuk dkuiqj
ekU;oj fuosnu gS fd gekjk yM+dk lq/khj dqekj xqIrk
mez 8 o"kZ jkf= 8 cts gwykxat xqM+eaMh ls dgha ykirk
gks x;k gSA d`i;k bldh fjiksVZ fy[k ys rFkk mfpr
O;oLFkk djsaA Hkonh; claryky xqIrk 69@115 Hkwlk
Vksyh dkuiqj rQlhy yM+dk 8 o"kZ dn ukVk jax
lkaoyk diM+k igus gjk isUV lQsn cq'kVZ Nih gq;h
clarykyA ,oa ckor ryk'k yMdk izk0+ &&&lEcfU/kr
jokuk fd;k tkosxkA
ys[kd
cknke flag dk0iq0
rk0 23&7&82
662 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

7. On 24.07.1982, at about 7.30 A.M.,
S.I. Prem Kumar Mishra, P.W.-9, started
enquiry/investigation on the basis of
missing report. The police as well as family
members of missing minor boy Sudhir
Kumar Gupta alias Daynee, were searching
for the missing child.

8. The accused-appellant, Kalloo, was
serving in the house as well as shop of
P.W.-1.
Consequently,
they
went
to
Kalloo's residence that night and the
following day, from morning to evening.
However, Kalloo's father stated that the
accused (Kalloo/appellant) had gone to see
a picture but hadn't returned since the
evening of July 23, 1982. The police and
the
abducted
child's
family
began
searching for Kalloo. The police then
received information that Kalloo and others
might be arrested if they will go alongwith
mukhbir.
Subsequently,
the
appellant
Kalloo alongwith two other persons,
namely, Pradeep and Pankaj was arrested.
On 24.07.1982, at about 5.45 P.M.
(evening) on the pointing out of appellant
Kalloo and two other co-accused, clothes of
the abducted child Sudhir Kumar Gupta
alias Daynee was recovered from bushes.
In the presence of Basant Lal Gupta; P.W.-
1, Ashok Kumar; P.W.-7 and Puttan Lal,
the recovery memo of clothes and slipper
were prepared by P.W.-9 S.I. Prem Kumar
Mishra and same was proved during trial
and it was shown as Ex. Ka-2. After
recovery of clothes and slippers on the
point out of appellant-Kalloo and other the
dead body of minor child was recovered
from a pond. The relevant portion of the
memo of recovery of dead body is being
quoted below:

"अतः उपरोक्त बयािों िे आधार पर
उपरोक्त तीिों किरफतार शुदा मुकल्जमाि िो
आिे िरिे मय िवाहाि ठीि उसी स्थाि
पर पहुंचे जहां पर उपरोक्त सुधीर िुमार िुप्ता
िी लाश िो िडा होिा बताया िया
उपरोक्त िल्लू, प्रदीप, पंिज िे िवाहाि
उपरोक्त िे समि तलइया िे पूवी कदशा िे
कििारे से तीि िदम पािी िे अन्दर घुसिर
3 कफर् िहराई से िुछ कमर्र्ी बिैिर
हर्ािर एि बच्चे िी लाश बरामद िी
और उसे लािर जैसे ही पािी िे बाहर रखा
कि उस मृति िे कपता श्री बसंत लाल िुप्ता
व सिे सम्बन्धी जो मौजूद थे कलपर् िर
रोिे लिे और यह बताया कि यह वही
बच्चा सुधीर िुमार िुप्ता उफभ डेिी है जो
कद० 23-7-82 िो राकत्र िे समय िुम हो
िया था मृति िे कपता व सिे सम्बंकधयों
िो िाफी समझािे बुझािे व कदलाशा देिे
िे बाद उपरोक्त शव िो िब्जा पुकलस में
कलया िया लाश िा पंचायतिामा बाद फदभ
मुरत्तवी कलया जा रहा है फदभ मौिे पर
मुरत्त्तब िरिे बाद सुिािे मजबूि अलामात
िवाहाि बिवाये जा रहे है।
ह० अशोक कुमार
ह०अप०
ह० बसांिलाल गुप्ता
एस०आई०
हव पुत्तन लाल गुप्ता
24-7-82

समय 6.45 पी०एम०"

9. After recovery of the dead body of
Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias Daynee, P.W.-9
S.I. Prem Kumar Mishra prepared the
recovery memo of dead body of the
deceased
Sudhir
Kumar
Gupta
alias
Daynee at 6.45 P.M. The recovery memo
was also proved by the P.W.-9 and it was
shown as Ex. Ka-3.

10. P.W.-9 has also deposed that he
has recorded statement of Basant Lal Gupta
(P.W.-1) and Kumari Kalpana (P.W.-3). He
has stated that he has also prepared
Panchayatnama on the direction of
inspector of the police station and also sent
5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
663
the dead body for post mortem. On
25.07.1982, post mortem was conducted on
the dead body of the deceased aged about 8
years and duration of dead body has been
mentioned about 1 and 1⁄2 days and cause of
death has been mentioned as death due to
asphyxia as a result of drowning with
strangulation.

11. P.W.-10, Incharge Officer of
police station deposed before the court that
after recovery of the dead body of the
deceased, Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias
Daynee, the missing report was converted
into Crime No. 265 of 1982, under sections
365/302/201 read with section 34 I.P.C.
and, thereafter, the investigation was
handed over to P.W.-10 (Incharge Officer)
Sri Satish Chandra Seth. P.W.-10 after
investigating the matter submitted charge
sheet against three accused persons,
namely, Kalloo, Pradeep Kumar and Pankaj
Gupta and on the charge sheet cognizance
has been taken by the concerned Judicial
Magistrate under section 190(1)(b) Cr.P.C.
and after compliance of provisions of
section
207
Cr.P.C.,
the
case
was
committed to the court of Sessions Judge,
Kanpur, under section 209 Cr.P.C. and in
the session trial the case was numbered as
Session Trial No. 391 of 1982. The court of
Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur, framed
charges against Kalloo, Pradeep Kumar and
Pankaj Gupta under sections 364, 302 and
201 I.P.C. The accused have not pleaded
guilty, therefore, the trial court directed the
prosecution to adduce his witnesses.

12. The prosecution has adduced his
witnesses as P.W.-1 Basant Lal Gupta,
father of the deceased, P.W.-2; Rajji Lal,
P.W.-3; Kumari Kalpana Gupta (aged
about 11 years), P.W.-4; Ramesh Chandra
Gupta, P.W.-5; head constable Pratap
Singh, P.W.-6; Heera Lal Gupta, P.W.-7;
Ashok Kumar, P.W.-8; Dr. K.K. Omar,
P.W.-9; S.I. Prem Kumar Mishra and P.W.-
10; Satish Chandra Seth (Inspector).

13. The P.W.-1 Basant Lal was
adduced as prosecution witness before the
trial court who deposed in his examinationin-chief that the accused Kalloo is serving
at the shop as well as house of Basant Lal
before four years of the alleged incident
and the house of Kalloo is situated about 1
and 1/2 Farlang away from his residence.
The shop of father of accused-appellant
Kalloo is also on the lower portion of house
of the father of P.W.-1. The P.W.-1
deposed before the court that he and his
wife went for walking and at that time his
daughter, his son and Kalloo-appellant was
at the residence of his father and when he
came back from walking, he could not
found his son, therefore, he went to search
his son at the residence of Kalloo and the
father of Kalloo informed that Kalloo went
to see the picture but he hadn't returned
since the evening of July 23, 1982. In the
morning, about 6.30 A.M., the daughter
Kumari Kalpana (P.W.-3) also informed
that the deceased was accompanied with
Kalloo. The relevant portion of the
examination-in-chief of P.W.-1 is being
reproduced herein below:

"(2) घर्िा िे चार साल पहले से िल्लू मुलकजम
हाकजर अदालत मेरे यहां िाम िरता था यह हमारे घर िा िामिाज
तथा दुिाि िा मसाला बिािे िा िाम िरता था। िल्लू िा मिाि
मेरे मिाि से आधा फलाांि दूर पर है। िल्लू िे कपता िी दुिाि मेरे
कपता िे मिाि िे िीचे है। मुलकजम पंिज व प्रदीप हाकजर अदालत
िो जािता ह ाँ। ये तीिों आपस में दोस्त है। प्रदीप व पंिज िे
मिािात र्ी हमारे मिाि से िरीब आधा पौि फलाांि दूर है।

(3) आज से दस साढे दस माह िे पहले िा वाक्या
है पांच साढे पांच िा समय था मैं अपिे घर में था। मेर तीिों बच्चे
मेरी पत्िी तथा िल्लू घर में थे। िल्पिा व सुधीर ह लािंज मेरे कपता
िे मिाि पर खेलिे िूदिे चले िए। हम लोि यािी मैं मेरी पत्िी व
छोर्ी लडिी घूमिे कििल िए। जब ति हम लोि घर पर थे िल्लू
घर पर रहा जब हम लोि चले िए तब यह र्ी कििल िया। रात िे
664 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
साढे आठ बजे हम लोि घूम कफर िर वापस आए उस बीच मेरा
छोर्ा र्ाई िमल कपता जी िे मिाि से आया उस समय िरीब िौ
बजा था और पूंछा कि "डेिी यहां तो िही आया िाफी देर से कमल
िहीं रहा है।" इसिे यह िहिे पर मैं व िमल उसे ढूढिे कििल िया।
आस पास देखिर पौिे दस बजे घर वापस आया। सब लोिो िे िहा
कि थािे पर ररपोर्भ िर दो। तब मैंिे घर पर बैठिर अपिे हाथ से
ररपोर्भ कलखी जो इक्ज ि 1 है। मेरे हाथ िी कलखी व दस्तखती है
उसे थािे मे ले जािर लिर्ि दस बजे दाकखल किया रात में। सब
लोिों िे और हम व िमल िे र्ी िहा कि िल्लू िे घर चल िर देख
ले। हम िमल, राम प्रिाश, सुरेशचंद्र िुप्ता िल्लू िे घर िए। वहां
िल्लू िहीं कमला उसिे कपता रामलाल कमले। उन्होंिे बताया कि "
िल्लू कपक्चर देखिे िह िर िया है" हम लोि ढूढ ढाड िर ढाई बजे
राम वापस घर आए। सबेरे छः साढे छः बजे मेरी लडिी िल्पिा िे
बताया कि िल्लू कपता जी िे घर िे िीचे लार्री िी दुिाि िे पास
खडा होिर इशारा से डेिी िो बुला रहा था इस पर डेिी िीचे चला
िया। िल्लू िे डेिी िो लार्री िे पुरािे कर्िर् कदए और िुछ बाते
िरता रहा इसिे बाद वह डेिी िो िैिाल रोड िी तरफ ले िया।
इसिे बाद डेिी कफर वापस िहीं आया। इस सूचिा पर मैं कफर अपिे
र्ाईयों िे साथ िल्लू िे घर िया िल्लू िे कपता राम लाल िे बताया
कि वह रात से कपक्चर देखिर वापस ही िहीं आया। कफर मुझे पर
शंिा होिे लिी और हम लोि घर चले आए हम लोिों िे घर आिे
िे पांच सात कमिर् बाद ही पुकलस वाले आ िए मैंिे शंिा िे बारे में
पकलस वालो िो बताया कि मुझे िल्लू व उसिे साथ घूमिे वाले
पंिज व प्रदीप पर शंिा है पुकलस वालों िे िहा कि हम तो देखेिे ही
आप र्ी इि लोिो िे घर पर में इधर उधर देखे कदए जब र्ी िोई
सूचिा इसिे या लडिे िे बारे में कमले तो हमें सूकचत िरते रकहए। यह
र्ी िहा कि यकद िोई सूचिा ि र्ी कमल तो र्ी दोपहर बाद मुझे
अपिी पूरी ररपोर्भ दीकजए।"

(4) पुकलस जब मुझे कहदायत देिर चली िई तब मैं
बच्चे िो इधर उधर ढूंढता रहा। मुलकजमाि िे घर में र्ी इधर उधर
दूढता रहा। मुलकजमाि र्ी घर पर िहीं कमले तथा मेरा बच्चा डेिी ही
कमला। कफर दोपहर बाद तीि सवा तीि बजे चौिी ह लािंज िया वहां
पर दरोिा जी िो तलाश किया। वहां मालूम हुवा कि दरोिा जी
सुन्दर र्ािीज िए है। हमारे साथ हमारे र्ाई पुत्ति लाल सुन्दर
र्ािीज 3-3-30 बज िए। वहां कमश्रा जी दरोिा कमले। उििो मैंिे
बताया कि मुलकजमाि तथा मेरा लडिा िहीं कमला। सुन्दर र्ािीज
पर ही अशोि िुमार आ िए थोडी देर बाद सेठ साहब इन्सपेक्र्र
आ िए उििी जीप पर एि मुखकबर र्ी था। सेठ साहब िे कमश्रा
दरोिा जी से िहा कि इस मुखकबर िे साथ सकिभर् हाउस जाजमऊ
िी तरफ चले जाइए उधर ही मुलकजमाि िे कमलिे िी सम्र्ाविा है।
जीप पर मैं, अशोि िुमार, पुत्ति तथा कमश्रा दरोिा दो तीि कसपाही
व मुखकबर बैठिर सकिभर् हाउस िे पास पुकलया िे पहले ही मुखकबर
िे िाडी रूिवा दी वहीं पर िल्लू, पंिज व पदीप मुलकजमाि खडे
थे। हम लोि जीप से उतरे हम लोिों िो उत्तरते देख तीि मुलकजमाि
र्ािे परन्तु हम लोिों िे दौडा िर इि तीिों िो पिड कलया। दरोिा
जी िे तीिों से िाम पते पूछे। मुझसे पूछा तो मैंिे िहा कि यही तीिों
है। दरोिा जी िे इि तीिो से डेिी िे कबिय में पूछााँ तब िल्लू िे मेरा
पैर पिडते हुए िहा कि प्रदीप व पंिज़ िे िहिे पर पन्द्रह हजार
रूपया कफरौती िे उददेश्य से डेिी िा अपहरण िर कलया है। पूछिे
पर िल्लू िे यह र्ी बताया कि डैिी िी लाश चांदमारी िेत्र में एि
तालाब में डाल दी है। िपडे जयपुररया पािभ िे सामिे एि झाडी में
रख कदए है तथा यह र्ी बताया कि डैिी िो रखिे िी जिह ि
कमलिे िे िारण हम लोिों िे उसिी हत्या िी है। उसिे िहा कि
लाश व िपडे हम बरामद िरवा देिें। वहां से हम लोि जयपुररया
पािभ िए वहां पर मुलकजमाि िे िहिे से जीि जयपुररया पािभ िे
सामिे रूि िई सर्ी लोि िीचे उत्तरे मुलकजमाि से िहा िया कि
िपडे मृति िे कििाकलए। इस पर तीिों एि दूसरे से िहिे लिे कि
तुमिे रखा है तुमिे रखा है। तीिो मुलकजमाि झाडी में घुसा िर िल्लू
अकर्युक्त एि पोर्ली लेिर बाहर कििला। उसमें तीि चीजे कििली
एि पैन्र्, एि बुशर्भ व एि चप्पल कििली। वे इक्ज-1 र्ू है से
तीिो मेरे बच्चे िी थी। िपडा िे कििलिे िे बाद वहीं उििी फदभ
कलखी िई जो फदभ इक्ज ि 2 है इस पर मेरे र्ी दस्तखत है। मेरा
लडिा यही तीिों चीजे पकहिे मेरे कपता जी िे घर िया था। िपडो
िो वही पर सील मुहर किया िया। इसिे बाद हम सब लोि थािे
िए।

(5) जहां से िपडे बरामद हुए थे वहां से थािा
िेवल आधा फलाांि है। थािे पर िपडे आकद जमा िरवाए िए और
थािे से िुछ िािजात लेिर चांदमारी वाले िेत्र पर हम लोि िए
वहां एि तालाब िे पास तीिों मुलकजमाि िे िहिे से जीप रोिी
िई। सब लोि जीप से उत्तरे। वहां तीिों एि तालाब में घुसे और
िल्लू िे लडिे िा हाथ पिडा और िहा कि र्ैय्या तुम दोिों र्ी
आओ उस पर इि दोिों में र्ी लडिे िा पैर पिडा तथा तीिों िे
कमलिर लाश बाहर कििाली। मैंिे लाश िो पकहचािा कफर फद्र
कलखी िई हमारे दस्तखत तथा पुत्ति व अशोि िे दस्तखत बिवाए
िए फदभ इक्ज- ि-3 है। मौिे पर पंचायतिामा कलखा िया तथा
लाश सील हुई तथा पोस्र्मार्भम िो कर्जवाई िई।''

14. P.W.-1 also deposed that when his
son could not come back then he had
apprehension about accused Kalloo. The
P.W.-1 in his cross-examination has also
deposed that the appellant was his servant
and also deposed that the recovery of
clothes, as well as, dead body was done
before him on the pointing out of accused
Kalloo and others.
5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
665

15. The Prosecution also adduced
P.W.-2,
Rajji
Lal,
who
in
his
examination-in-chief,
deposed
that
appellant Kalloo called Sudhir (the minor
child) and Kalloo accompanied with the
minor child and went towards the canal.
The relevant portion of his examination-inchief is quoted below:

"(2) आज से दस ग्यारह माह िी बात है। ईद िा
त्यौहार था। शाम िे सात साढे सात बजे िा समय था मैं अपिी
उपरोक्त दुिाि पर बैठा था। मैिे अपिी से देखा कि िल्लू लार्री
िोयल वाले िी दुिाि पर खडा सुधीर उफभ डैिी िो बुला रहा है।
सुधीर अपिे बाबा अन्िी लाल िे मिाि िे छजजे पर खडा था।
सुधीर उतर िर िीचे िल्लू िे पास आया। ये दोिों आपस में
बातचीत िरते हुए दस कमिर् रूिे कफर िल्लू सुधीर िो लेिर िहर
कििारे िी तरफ चला िया।"

16. The P.W.-2 also deposed in his
deposition that he informed P.W.-1 next
day of the alleged incident that appellant
Kalloo had enticed away his son.

17. The prosecution also adduced
P.W.-3, Kumari Kalpana, aged about 11
years. As P.W.-3 was a minor, therefore,
the presiding officer followed the standard
procedure for recording deposition of a
minor child. The Presiding Officer had put
some moral question to the child witness
and when the presiding officer found that
she is fit to give her statement, then her
statement was recorded. The deposition
was recorded by the court putting question
to the witness aged about 11 years, P.W.-3
deposed that appellant Kalloo called her
brother "Deynee" minor child aged about 8
years and gave some old tickets of lottery
to the minor child, Sudhir, and both went
towards the canal. P.W.-3 further deposed
before the court that she and her brother
had come to the residence of their
grandfather. She deposed that she left her
house at about 7.30 P.M. At that time, her
father, mother, younger sister and Kalloo
(the
servant)
were
present
at
their
residence. After 7.30 P.M., Kalloo also
came
outside
the
residence
of
her
grandfather. Her brother was standing on
the balcony of first floor of the house of her
grandfather and the appellant Kalloo called
his
brother
and
enticed
away
after
providing old ticket of lottery. On the next
morning, she informed the entire incident
to his father P.W.-1. The relevant portion
of the examination-in-chief of P.W.-3 is
quoted below:

"मेरा िाम िुमारी िल्पिा िुप्ता उफभ डेजी मेरे कपता िा
िाम पुत्री बसन्त लाल मेरी आयु 11 साल व्यवसाय
कवद्याथी मेरा घर स्थाि दािा खोरी थािा हरवंश मुहाल
कजला िािपुर में है।
मैं स्थाि में रहता ह ाँ।
I had a talk with the witness she
understand the questions & replies
properly.
She understands
the
sanctity of oath while she says"
िलत िसम खािे से पाप पडता है।
oath administered to the witness by
me.
प्रश्न- आज से कितिे कदि पहले िी बात है
उत्तर- िरीब 10-1/2 माह पकहले िी बात है।
प्रश्न- डैिी तुम्हारा िौि था
उत्तर- मेरा र्ाई था।
प्रश्न- कितिा बजा था।
उत्तर- शाम िे 4-1/2 बजे थे।
The answers can be written in the
narrative form.
मैं अपिे बाबा िे यहां िई थी। मेरे साथ मेरा र्ाई सुधीर
उफभ डैिी र्ी था। अपिे घर से 7-1/2 बजे चली थी।
जब घर से चली थी तो घर में मेरे कपता जी, मां, छोर्ी
बकहि व िल्लू िौिर थे। िल्लू घरेलू िौिर था। 71/2 बजे दादी िे मैं िमरे में बैठी थी। यह िमरा बीच
खण्ड में है। उस िमरे िा दरवाजा सडि िी ओर
खुलता है। िमरे में मैं र्ी०वी० देख रही थी। डैिी िो
र्ी०वी० अच्छा िहीं लिा रहा था तो वह छज्जे पर
चला िया। मैं िमरे से जब िल्लू िी आवाज 'डैिी'
िरिे सुिी तो मैं र्ी छज्जे पर चली िई। डैिी िल्लूिी
666 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
ओर देखिे लिा। िल्लू िे इशारा िरिे सुधीर िो
बुलाया तो सुधीर िल्लू िे पास िीचे चला िया। िल्लू
िे िोयल लारी सेण्र्र िे िाउण्र्र िे बाहर से इशारा
किया था। िल्लू िे सुधीर िो िुछ लारी िे पुरािे
कर्िर् कदये कफर उसे िहर िे तरफ ले िया। उसिे बाद
मैं अन्दर िो चली िई। जब िाफी देर हो िई तो मुझे
घबराहर् होिे लिी तो िमल चाचा जी िो बताया कि
सुधीर िीचे िया हुआ था अर्ी आया िहीं। कफर िमल
चाचा उसे ढूंढिे चले िये 10-1/2 बजे रात िे िरीब
में अपिे घर चली आयी। घर में जब िई तो मम्मी पापा
घर पर िहीं थे। मेरी छोर्ी बकहि सो रही थी। मैं र्ी सो
िई। सुबह उठिर देखा कि सर्ी लोि सुधीर िो ढूढ रहे
है तब पापा िे मुझसे पूछा तो सब बात उन्हें बताई। "

18. The minor witness, aged about 11
years, was cross examined by the defence.
In her cross-examination, she has deposed
that her brother Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias
Deynee was enticed away by accused
Kalloo.

19.
Prosecution
adduced
P.W.-4,
Ramesh Chandra Gupta, who deposed
before the court that at about 8.00 P.M.,
Sudhir Kumar Gupta alias Deynee was
sitting on the rod of bicycle being ridden by
accused Pradeep, while the appellant
Kalloo
was
sitting
on
the
carrier.
Approximately five to six steps behind
them, accused Pankaj was riding another
bicycle.
The
relevant
portion
of
examination-in-chief of P.W.-4 is quoted
below:

"(2) आज से िरीब 9-10 माह पकहले िी बात है।
मैं अपिे दोस्त से कमलिे िे कलए ररयो रेस्र्ोरेन्र् हीर
पैलेस िे सामिे खडा था। िुल्फी खा रहा था। सडि िे
तरफ मुंह किए अपिे दोस्त िौकसि िा इन्तजार िर रहा
था। उस समय लिर्ि 8 बजे रात िा समय था। मैंिे
देखा कि िहर िे तरफ से आिे डण्डे पर सुधीर बैठा था
उस साइकिल िो प्रदीप चला रहा था। उसी साइकिलिे
पीछे िैररयर पर िल्लू बैठा था। साइकिल िे 5, 6
िदम पीछे एि साइकिल पर पंिज जा रहे थे। यह सब
लोि सुन्दर र्ािीज िे तरफ जा रहे थे।"

20. In his cross-examination, he has
deposed that he came to know about the
incident
through
a
newspaper
on
26.07.1982, Subsequently, on 27.07.1982,
he informed to the P.W.-1 that he had seen
the accused persons going by bicycle
alongwith minor child. The police recorded
his statement 10-11 days later.

21. The prosecution also adduced
P.W.-5, Pratap Singh (head constable
164), who has proved the missing report, as
well as the General Diary (G.D. entry)
regarding the recovery as well as arrest of
the accused persons.

22. Prosecution has also adduced
P.W.-6, Hira Lal Gupta, who deposed in
his examination-in-chief that he saw Kalloo
alongwith two other co-accused persons on
the date of alleged incident.

23. P.W.-7 Ashok Kumar, in his
deposition before the trial court, deposed
that he knew all three accused persons. He
further deposed that earlier, at about 4
O'clock, he met with Chowki in-charge,
Shri Mishra, who was alone and quite upset
there, when P.W.-7 inquired about this,
subsequently, he was informed about the
abduction of a boy named Deynee. At the
same time, the informant, Basant Lal along
with Puttan arrived. The sub-inspector told
him that the said missing boy was son of
Basant Lal. At that time, Inspector Seth
also arrived at the same location with some
police personnel and an unknown person.
The inspector instructed Sub-Inspector
Mishra to accompany these individuals
towards the circuit house. Following this,
P.W.-7, along with Sub-Inspector Mishra,
the unknown person, the informant, and
Puttan travelled by jeep towards the circuit
house. The jeep was stopped on the
instruction
of
the
unknown
person
5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
667
(Mukhbir). When the jeep stopped, they
saw the accused, Kalloo, Pradeep, and
Pankaj there and further accused attempted
to flee away but were surrounded by the
police and apprehended. Sub-Inspector
Mishra asked for the names of these
persons. P.W.-1, the informant, confirmed
their identities. Subsequently, the accused
Kalloo touched the feet of the informant
Basant Lal and started crying and further
admitted that he had kidnapped Deynee for
ransom. He then stated that Deynee had
been killed by them and indicated that the
dead body and clothes would be recovered.
Accused further specified that clothes
would be recovered from the bushes of
Jaipuria Park and the dead body would be
recovered from Chandmari area. Thereafter
these three accused persons accompanied
the police and they also recovered the
clothes from the bushes of Jaipuria Park
and the dead body from the pond in
Chandmari area. The relevant portion of his
examination-in-chief is quoted herein
below:

"तीिों मुलकजमाि हाकजर अदालत िो पहले से जािता
ह ाँ ये लोि हमारे पडोसी थे। सुन्दर र्ािीज पर चार बजे
कदि मुझे चौिी इन्चाजभ श्री कमश्रा जी कमले उस समय वे
अिेले थे । मैंिे उन्हें िुछ परेशाि कदखाई कदए मैंिे पूछा
क्यों परेशाि हो। उन्होिें िहा कि एि लडिा डैिी िा
अपहरण हो िया है उसी समय बसन्तलाल िुप्ता व पुत्ति
आ िए। दरोिा जी िे बताया कि इन्ही िा बच्चा था।
इसी बीच इन्स्पेक्र्र सेठ आ िए और उििे साथ िुछ
कसपाही तथा एि अिजाि आदमी र्ी था। सेठ जी िे
कमश्रा जी से िहा कि आप इस आदमी िे साथ सकिभर्
हाउस िी तरफ चले जाये कफर मैं कमश्रा जी व आदमी
तथा बसन्त लाल व पुत्ति सब जीप से पुल िे उपर से
होते हुए सकिभर् हाउस िी तरफ चले। हम लोि जीप से
सकिभर् हाउस िे आिे पहुंचे पुल िे पास उस अिजाि
आदमी िे िहिे से जीप रूिी। जीप िे रूििे पर
िल्लू प्रदीप पंिज तीिों िजर आए जीप रूिते ही ये
तीिों र्ाििे िी िोकशश िरिे लिे। हम लोिों िे घेर िर
िुछ दूर पर तीिों िो पिड कलया। कमश्राजी िे इि तीिों
िा िाम पूंछा तथा बसन्त लाल िुप्ता से पूंछा कि क्या ये
वहीं लोि है इस पर बसन्त लाल िे िहा कि हां यही है।
उसिे बाद िल्लू बसन्त लाल िा पैर पिड िर रोिे
लिा और िहा कि डैिी िो कफरौती िे कलए पिड िर
लाए थे िल्ती हो िई माफ किया जावे। (opposed
by defence) उसिे िहा कि हमिे उसे मार कदया है
और िपडे व लाश बरामद िरा देिें। जयपुररया पािभ िे
सामिे इमली िे पेड िे पास झाकडयां है वहां से िपडे
बरामद िरिे िो बताया और लाश िो चांदमारी िेत्र में
बताया।

(2) इसिे बाद तीिों मुलकजमाि जीप पर बैठ िर
जयपुररया पािभ िे पास आए । वहां पर िल्लू िे जीप
रोििे िो िहा उतिे ि बाद तीिो मुलकजमाि झाडी में
घुसे तथा िल्लू िे पोर्ली कििालिर दी उसमें से एि
हाफ पैन्र् एि बुशर्भ तथा एि चप्पल कििली ये सामाि
आज अदालत में है जो इक्ज 1 ता III है। इस सामाि
िी कलखा पढी हुई फदभ इक्ज ि-2 है इस पर मेरे र्ी
हस्तािर है। इसिे बाद हम लोि थािे वापस आए कफर
थािे से चांदमारी िेत्र िए तीिों मुलकजमाि िे बतािे िे
अिुसार वहां िए। चांदमारी िेत्र में तालाब िे कििारे
मुलकजमाि िे िहिे से िाडी रोि दी और तीिो तालाब
में घुसे लाश िडी हुई थी िल्लू िे पैर पिड िर
कििाला पंिज व प्रदीप िे मदद िी। लाश कििाल िर
बाहर रखी िई तथा कलखा पढी िी िई फदभ इक्ज ि 3
है इस पर मेरे हस्तािर है। बच्चे िे शरीर पर सैन्डो
बकियाइि थी जो आज अदालत में है यह इक्ज IV है।"

24. P.W.-7, in his cross-examination,
also supported his deposition from the
examination-in-chief.

25. The prosecution produced P.W.-8,
Dr. K.K. Omar, who, in his deposition,
confirmed the contents of the post-mortem
report. He deposed that the deceased was
approximately 8 years old and the dead
body was about one and a half days old.
Rigor mortis had passed and decomposition
was just started to begin and on the dead
body, there was a bluish mark near the
neck, measuring 6.4 inches and death was
found due to asphyxia as a result of
strangulation. Post-mortem report was
proved by P.W.-8 and exhibited as
668 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Ex.Ka.7. The relevant portion of the
examination-in-chief
is
quoted
hereinbelow:

'' उस कदि सुधीर िुमार पुत्र बसन्त लाल िे सील्ड शव
िा मौतोपरान्त परीिण मैंिे 2-15 पी०एम० पर किया
था। मृति िी उम्र लिर्ि 8 साल िी थी। उसिे मरे
लिर्ि 1-1/2 कदि हो चुिा था। मौत िी अिडि
पास ऑफ हो िई थी। कडिम्पोकजशि शुरू हो िया था।
उसिे शरीर पर किम्िकलकखत चोर्े पायी। (1) किलिू
किशाि दाकहिे िाि िे िीचे िदभि में 6" x 4" िा।
और िोई जाकहरा चोर् िहीं था।मृति िी मृत्यु िला
दबािे तथा सांस िे घुर्ि िे िारण हुआ था।
पोस्र्मार्भम ररपोर्भ इक्ज ि 9 मेरे हाथ िी कलखी व
दस्तखती है वरवक्त मुआइिा तैयार किया िया था। ''

26. The prosecution also adduced
P.W.-9, Sub-Inspector Prem Mishra,
who inquired/investigated the case after
receiving the missing report. In his
deposition, he deposed that one day after
the incident i.e. 24.07.1982, he started
enquiry/investigation at 7:30 A.M. He
recorded statements of informant Basant
Lal (P.W.-1) and Kumari Kalpana (P.W.-
3). Thereafter, at about 4:00 P.M., he was
standing near Sundar Talkies talking to
Ashok Kumar where Basant Lal, (P.W.-1),
and Puttan came there and informed him
that accused Kalloo, Pradeep, and Pankaj
were not present at their residence. At the
same time, Inspector Shri S.C. Seth arrived
in a police jeep, accompanied by an
unknown person. The inspector directed
him to go along with that unknown person
towards the circuit house, stating that
accused Kalloo, Pradeep, and Pankaj were
present there. He, along with police
personnel, informant, Puttan, and Ashok,
went by jeep, with Mukbir. The mukhbir
was sitting on the front seat of the jeep. As
soon as they reached near the Pulia (small
bridge) towards the circuit house, they
found the accused Kalloo, Pradeep, and
Pankaj sitting on the Pulia. Accused Kalloo
attempted
to
flee,
but
they
were
apprehended by the police. Accused Kalloo
touched the feet of informant Basant Lal
Gupta and started crying and asked for
pardon. He told to the P.W.-1 that the
clothes and dead body of Deynee would be
recovered, claiming that the clothes would
be found in Jaipuria Park and the dead
body in a pond located in the Chandmari
area. Later, these items were recovered and
identified by P.W.-1, Basant Lal (father of
the deceased). The relevant portion of the
examination-in-chief of PW-9, S.I. is being
quoted below:
''जुलाई सि 1982 में चौिी हरवंश मुहाल थािा
हरवंश मुहाल में सब इन्स्पेक्र्र िे पद पर तैिात था इस
मुिदमा िी तफतीश मुझे कमली। मैंिे कदिांि 24-782 िो समय िरीब साढे सात बजे शुरू िी। ििल
रपर् िेस डायरी में दजभ िी। वादी बसन्त लाल िा
बयाि कलया कफर िुमारी िल्पिा उफभ डेजी िा बयाि
कलया। कफर िरीब चार बजे शाम िो मैं सुन्दर र्ािीज
पर खडा अशोि िुमार से बात िर रहा था उसी समय
बसन्त लाल व पुत्ति वहां पर आए उििा अशोि से
पररचय िराया उन्होंिे बताया कि िल्लू, प्रदीप व पंिज
अपिे घर पर मौजूद िहीं है। उसी बीच इन्स्पेक्र्र श्री सेठ
जीप से आ िए उििे साथ एि व्यकक्त और था श्री सेठ
िे मुझसे िहा कि जीप में बैठिर इसिे साथ सकिभर्
हाउस िी तरफ जाओं क्योंकि िल्लू, पंिज व प्रदीप
मौजूद है। इस पर मैं बहमराह िमभचारीिण बसन्त िुमार
िुप्ता व पुत्ति लाल व अशोि िो र्ी बैठा कलया।
मुखकबर िो आिे जीप में कवठािर रवािा हुए। सकिभर्
हाउस िे आिे जाजमऊ रोड पर पुकलया िे पकहले
िरीब तीस िदम पर जीप रोंि कदया जीप िो देखिर
पुकलया पर बैठे िल्लू, पंिज व प्रदीप जो जीप देखिर
र्ािे उन्हें हम लोिों िे घेर िर व दौडािर पिड कलया।
पिडे जािे पर िल्लू, बसन्त लाल िुप्ता िे पैरो पर किर
िर रोिे लिा तथा माफी मााँििे लिा और िहा कि
िपडे व लाश सुधीर िी बरामद िरवा दूंिा उसिे
िपडो िो जयपुररया पािभ िे पास झाडी िे अन्दर से
बरामद िरािे िो िहा व लाश िो चादमारी तालाब िे
अन्दर से बरामद िरवािे िो िहा आपोज्ड। हम सब
लोि जीप पर जयपुररया पािभ िे पास आए। अकर्युक्त
िल्लू, पंिज व प्रदीप तीिों िे आिे आिे चलिर
5 All. Kalloo Vs. State of U.P.
669
झाडी िे अन्दर से िल्लू िे िपडों िो कििाल िर
कदया और पंिज व प्रदीप िे सहयोि किया। िपडो िो
देखिर बसन्त लाल िुप्ता िे अपिे लडिे सुधीर िे
िपडे होिा कशिाख्त किया। मौिे पर िपडो िी फदभ
तैयार िी जो इक्ज ि-2 है। यह मेरे हाथ िी कलखी व
दस्तखती है। तीिों मुलकजमाि व उक्त बरामद शुदा िपडे
मेरे कजल्द सामिे है। इसिे बाद थािे आए वहां से कजल्द
पंचायतिामा व जरूरी िािजात लेिर व हेडमुहररभर िो
कहदायत किया कि इन्स्पेक्र्र साहब जैसे ही आए उन्हें
चांदमारी िेत्र र्ेज दे। थािे से हम लोि यािी बसन्त
लाल पुत्ति, अशोि तथा तीिों अकर्युक्त चांदमारी
मैदाि चिेरी िए। वहां ये तीिों अकर्युक्त तालाब में
िरीब तीि कफर् िहराई से लाश िो कििाला। श्री बसन्त
लाल िुप्ता िे सुधीर िी लाश िी कशिाख्त िी। लाश
िी बरामदिी िी फदभ मौिे पर मैंिे अपिे हाथ से तैयार
किया इस पर िवाहों िे र्ी दस्तखत कलए फदभ इक्ज ि-
3 है। अंधेरा होिे लिा था पेरोमेक्स िी व्यवस्था िी
उसी समय इन्स्पेक्र्र साहब आ िए उििे किदेशि में
मैंिे पंचायतिामा इक्ज ि-11 मुरकत्तब किया चालाि
लाश बिाया। यह इक्ज ि 12 है। शव िा फोर्ो बिाया
जो इक्ज ि 13 हैं आर० आई महोदय िो कचर्ठी
कलखी जो इक्ज ि 14 है। सी०एम०ओ० िो
पोस्र्मार्भम हेतु पत्र कलखा जो इक्ज ि 15 है। मौिे पर
शव िो सवभ मुहर किया तथा िमूिा सील तैयार किया
जो इक्ज ि 16 है इसिे बाद इन्स्पेक्र्र महोदय िे
तफतीश अपिे हाथ में ले ली।''

27. P.W.-9 also supported the version
of the F.I.R. in his cross-examination and
also proved the arrest of the accused
appellant and recovery memo of clothes as
well as dead body of the deceased minor
boy.

28. The prosecution also adduced
P.W.-10 (Satish Chandra Seth), inspector
in-charge of Police Station Harbansh
Mohal, District Kanpur, who investigated
the matter after recovery of the dead body
of the deceased. In his examination-inchief, P.W.-10 has deposed that after the
recovery of the dead body, the missing
report was converted into First Information
Report, registered as Case Crime No. 265
of 1982, under sections 365, 302, 201 and
34 I.P.C. implicating accused Kalloo,
Pradeep and Pankaj. P.W.-10 also deposed
that Sub-Inspector Prem Kumar Mishra had
earlier conducted the investigation. He
further recorded the statement of witness
Ashok Kumar (P.W.-7), in whose presence
the recovery memo of dead body as well as
clothes of the deceased Sudhir was
prepared. A topography report was also
prepared in the presence of the witness
Ashok Kumar. P.W.-10 also deposed that
he recorded the statements of Basant Lal
and Puttan, as their statement was also
recorded by P.W.-9 after the missing report
was
filed.
The
relevant
portion
of
examination-in-chief of P.W.-10 is being
quoted below:-

"(1) विभ 1982 िे जुलाई माह में र्ी मैं थािा
हरवंश मुहाल में प्रर्ारी किरीिि िे पद पर था। कदिांि
24-7-82 िो थािा हरवंश मुहाल िे रोजिामचा
आम िी रपर् िं0 36 समय 20-30 बजे िुमशुदा
बच्चा सुधीर िुमार उफभ डैिी िी लाश बरामदिी िे
बाद अपराध संख्या 265 पर अन्तिभत धारा
365/302/ 201 सपकठत धारा 34 आई०पी०सी०
िा तरमीम किया िया। कजसमें अकर्युक्त िल्लू, प्रदीप
पंिज
थे।
(2) इस अकर्योि िी कववेचिा सब इन्स्पेक्र्र श्री
पी०िे० कमश्रा से ली कदिांि 25/7/82 से अपिी
िायभवाही प्रारम्र् िी। कदिांि-25/7/82 िो फदभ
बरामदिी मृति सुधीर िे िपडे व लाश िे िवाह
अशोि िुमार किवासी िकछयािा मोहाल िा बयाि
कलया। इसी िवाह िी किशादेही पर कजस स्थाि से
िपडा व लाश बरामद हुए थे अलि अलि िक्शा िजरी
बिाया जो मेरे लेख व हस्तािर में है ये िमशः इक्ज
ि-8 व इक्ज ि 9 है। इसमें खसरे दजभ है।

(3) इसिे बाद िवाहाि अन्य िे बयाि कलए। कदिांि
26-7-82 िो पुिः बसन्त लाल व पुत्ति लाल से
मजीद पुछतांछ िी। उििे बयािाम मुरकत्तब किए।
कदिांि 27-7-82 िो िास्र्ेवल रघुवीर कसंह व
670 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
िान्स्र्ेवल कििम लाल जो लाल िा पोस्र्मार्भम िरािे
ले िए थे उििे बयािात कलए।

(4) कदिांि 3-8-82 िो रज्जी लाल िुप्ता िमल
िुमार आकद, िे बयािात अंकित किए तथा रज्जी लाल
िुप्ता िी किशादेही पर जहााँ से सुधीर िुमार उफभ डैिी िे
अपहरण िरिे ले जाया िया था उसिा िक्शा िजरी
बिाया ।

(5) कदिांि 8-8-82 िो िवाह रमेश चंद्र िुप्ता तथा
हीरा लाल िुप्ता िे बयािात कलए। बाद तिमीला
तफतीश अकर्युक्तों िे कखलाफ चाजभशीर् इक्र् ि 10
है यह मेरी दस्तखती है।"

29. P.W.-10, Satish Chandra Seth, in
his cross-examination deposed that after
investigation he submitted a charge sheet
against the accused persons.

30. The learned trial court recorded the
statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. of the
accused persons where they have denied
the allegations.

31.
Learned
counsel
for
the
appellant submitted that there was delay
in recording the statements of the witnesses
by the Investigating Officer. He also
contended that there is discrepancy in the
investigation. It is also submitted by
learned counsel for the appellant that it is a
case of circumstantial evidence but there is
no motive assigned by the prosecution for
causing such incident by the accused.
Learned counsel for the appellant also
argued that there are contradictions in the
statements of the prosecution witnesses and
they have not supported the prosecution
case beyond reasonable doubt.