Back
K. SURESH REDDY, B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI
Godugula Keshava – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J.)
1. As all the four Criminal Appeals arise out of the same Sessions Case i.e., S.C.129/2012 on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Prodduturu, they are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.
2. Accused No.4 in S.C.129/2012 on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Prodduturu filed Crl.A.2458/2018, A-3 in S.C.129/2012 on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Prodduturu filed Crl.A.2483/2018, A-5 in S.C.129/2012 on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Prodduturu filed Crl.A.2559/2018 and A-1, A-2, A-6 and A-7 in S.C.129/2012 on the file of II Addl.Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Prodduturu filed Crl.A.2570/2018.
3. They along with A-8 were charged for the alleged offence punishable under sections 364-A, 342, 307 and 506 IPC in Cr.No.99/2011 of Yerraguntla Police Station.
4. During pendency of the trial, A-8 died and case against him was abated. A-1 to A-7 were tried by the learned II Asst. Sessions Judge under five charges. First charge is U/s.364-A IPC against A-3 to A-6, second charge is U/s.364-A IPC r/w.34 IPC against A-1 and A-2, third charge is 342 IPC against A-7 and A-8, fourth charge is U/s.307 r/w.511
The prosecution must prove both kidnapping and a threat to cause death or hurt to establish an offence under Section 364-A IPC; failure to do so leads to modification of charges.
Child witness - child witnesses were detained at the police station and, therefore, the court had observed that they were tutored by the police.
The prosecution must prove both kidnapping and a ransom demand for conviction under Section 364-A; failure to do so warrants only convictions under lesser charges.
The prosecution's failure to establish the fundamental elements of kidnapping and ransom resulted in the High Court overturning the convictions due to lack of evidence and procedural irregularities.
Interpretation of the Constitution cannot be frozen by its original understanding that it must evolve with the felt necessities of time, to meet the aspirations and challenges of the present and futu....
The prosecution must prove all elements of Section 364(A) IPC, including a clear connection between the act of hurt and the ransom demand; failure to do so warrants a lesser charge.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of meeting the conditions required for invoking Section 364A of IPC, including the demand of ransom and the threat to the kidnapped person's life.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
