Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
P. V. HARDAS & SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.
Madansingh Hirasingh Bhakuni – Appellant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos.738, 740, 741 of 2009.
Decided On : 14th October, 2014.
In the absence of compliance of essential prerequisites for the admission of tape recorded conversation as mandated by the Apex Court, the trial Court was not justified in placing reliance on the expert opinion at Exh. 109 and or on relying upon the transcripts of the recorded conversation. Needless to state that exclusion of tape recorded conversation vis-a-vis the report at Exh. 109 further weakens the cae of demand for ransom.
[INDIAN] PENAL CODE, 1860 - Section 364-A Conviction for kidnapping for ransom. Since evidence adduced by prosecution not proves charge of kidnapping and demand for ransom against accused hence conviction of accused set aside. The fact that the parents of PW 2 were called to attend this meeting probabalizes the defence that PW 2 had faired badly in his examination. The subsequent indifferent and unnatural conduct of PW 1 and PW 2 also gives an indication that all was not well between the father and son. This fact further supports the defence that the victim had quarreled with his father and probabalizes the defence that the victim was not kidnapped but had himself left the house on his own. The accused are, therefore, entitled for benefit of doubt.
Under the circumstances and in view of discussion supra, the evidence adduced by the prosecution cannot form the basis for conviction. The trial Judge has ignored the material discrepancies in the evidence and in Court’s considered view has erred in holding the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 364-A of the IPC.
Under the circumstances and in view of the discussion, the appeals are allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellants is hereby quashed and set aside and they are acquitted of the offence with which they were charged and convicted. Fine, if paid by the appellants be refunded to them. Since the appellants are in jail, they be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.:- These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 22.05.2009 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the aforesaid appellants, (hereinafter referred to as the accused) for the offence punishable under Section 364-A r/w 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced them to under go RI for life and to pay fine of Rs.200/- in default S.I. for 15 days and further convicted under Section 3 r/w 24 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.200/- in default SI for 15 days.
2. The brief facts necessary to decide these appeals are as under. Punit Sanghvi, the victim and the accused no.1, Madansingh Bhakuni were studying in Godavari High School, Chinchwad. On 29.09.2005 there was a parent teacher meet in the school. While the victim Punit was about to leave the school, the accused Madansingh requested him to come to his house to teach him accountancy. It is alleged that the accused Madansingh took Punit to the room of the coaccused Manojkumar (A3) and Mahendrasingh, ajuvenile. It is alleged that the accused Madansingh dragged Punit into the room while the coaccused Manojkumar and Mahendrasingh had revolver and knife in their hands and threatened to kill him in case he raised an alarm. They informed the victim Punit that they had kidnapped him for ransom and asked him to give the mobile number of his father. Thereafter, they covered his face with tape and kept him confined in the room, till 03.10.2005.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that during the said period, the accused made several calls to PW-1 Dilip Sangvi, the father of punit and demanded ransom of Rs.20 lakhs. On receiving the first call on 29.09.2005, Dilip Sangvi lodged a report at Exh.22, pursuant to which PW-14 Satish Deore, P.I. registered C.R. No.377 of 2005 at Pimpri Police Station against the unknown persons for offence punishable under Section 364-A r/w 34 of the I PC. It is the case of the prosecution that from 29.09.2005 till 02.10.2005, the accused had made several ransom calls to PW-1 Dilip Sangvi. PW-1 had divulged the subsequent events to the Police, pursuant to which his supplementary statements came to be recorded. It is further, the case of the prosecution that PW-1 had recorded the conversation of the kidnappers and had handed over the said audio cassette to the Investigating Officer, which was seized under panchanama at Exh.130.
4. It is alleged that on 03.10.2005, the brother of Madan singh rescued the victim and dropped him near his house. PW14 Satish Dcore, recorded the statement of the victim Punit (PW-2) and referred him to Yeshwantrao Chavan Hospital for medical examination. PW-11 Dr. Arvind Patil examined PW-2 Punit and submitted the medical certificate at EX. 101. Pursuant to the statement of the victim, PW-14 Satish Deore arrested the accused. Upon interrogation, the accused made disclosure statements, which led to the recovery of the revolver, knife and cookary. The police obtained the voice samples of the accused and sent the same for voice analysis. The police also recorded the statements of the witnesses and on completion of the investigation, a final report implicating the accused was filed before the J.M.F.C., Pimpri, Pune.
5. Upon committal of the case, the learned Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused for offence under Section 354 A of the IPC and under Section 3 r/w 25 of the Arms Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined 16 witnesses. The statements of the accused were recorded u/s 313 of the Cr. P.C. The accused denied having committed any offence and alleged that they were falsely implicated. On appreciating and analyzing the evidence on record, the learned trial Judge, held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 364-A r/w 34 of the IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, sentenced them as stated above. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the accused ha
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
