IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.379 of 1998 ==== Against the judgment and order dated 22.08.1998 passed by Shri B.K. Pd. Gupta, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar in Sessions Trial No. 204 of 1996. ***** Rajeshwari Singh, son of Late Jai Govind Singh, resident of village Dhansoi, P.S. Dhansoi, District- Buxar. .... .... Appellant Versus State of Bihar .... .... Respondent ==== For the Appellant : Mr. Vikram Deo Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. ==== P R E S E N T THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH **** J U D G M E N T Mandhata Singh, J. Fardbayan of Urmila Devi has been made basis for First Information Report which in brief is that her husband was posted at Ballia in Life Insurance Corporation of India and residing there for the purpose and she was residing here with her son of 3 ½ year. 2. Her further statement is that on 09.02.1995 her son Roushan Kumar was playing outside the house. He did not returned after two hours she (informant) began to search him, in that course one Manish Kumar of the same village told the informant that one Rajeshwari Singh (appellant of this case) had taken her son on his tractor. She went to Rajeshwari Singh, asked about her son, he became furious and denied to have her son. Police came and recorded her statement. 3. After concluding the trial case is ended in conviction Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.379 of 1998 dt.19-12-2011 2 and sentence. 4. After some argument on merit, learned counsel for the appellant prefers to press the sentence only. On this point his submission is that the victim was kidnapped for ransom. In course of investigation the victim boy was found kept secret by the appellant in house of Laxman Ahir which the trial Court believed but link was missing rather material was lacking on the point of recovery that it was on statement of this appellant. 5. According to the learned counsel if that is taken into consideration then the period undergone by the appellant which is from 11.02.1995 to 14.05.1996 and 22.08.1998 to 29.10.1998 may be observed sufficient for punishment. It is pertinent to mentioned here that Investigating Officer of this case is not examined. Otherwise also I am convinced with the submission made on behalf of the appellant. 6. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part on the point of sentence only that is minimize to the period undergone, conviction is affirmed. Petitioner-appellant is discharged from liabilities of bail bonds. 7. Copy of the judgment along with Lower Court Record be sent back to the trial Court forthwith. The Patna High Court The 19th Day of December, 2011 Saif/-N.A.F.R./ (Mandhata Singh, J.)