IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Vibha Kankanwadi, Rajesh S. Patil, JJ.
Jilani Khaja Sikalkar - Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.623 Of 2020
Decided On : 30-09-2022
The victim, a 12-year-old boy, was kidnapped and a ransom was demanded. The prosecution's evidence failed to prove the elements of Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code, but established the offence under Section 363 read with Section 34. The appellants were found guilty and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
JUDGMENT :
(Vibha Kankanwadi, J.)
1. Present appeal has been filed by original accused persons challenging their conviction by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Sessions Trial No.35/2018, thereby they have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month each, for the offence punishable under Section 364-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The prosecution case in the nutshell is – original informant Usha is the mother of the victim boy. Her son was aged 12 at the time of incident i.e. 25.10.2017. Her husband is working in Veterinary Hospital at Pingli. The victim boy was taking education in 6th standard at Bal Vidya Mandir, Parbhani and the family of the informant was residing at Parbhani. After the Diwali vacations the victim boy and his friends used to play cricket in Idgah Maidan daily around 4.00 p.m. When the boy returned in the evening after playing cricket on 23.10.2017, he handed over Rs.20/- to the mother and then the mother asked as to from where he has fetched the amount. He told that a person who was watching their match at Idgah Maidan appreciated his play and he has given Rs.20/- as prize/gift. The person had also promised that he would give him the bat and ball. As usual on 24.10.2017 also the boy went along with his two friends, played cricket and returned in the evening. On 25.10.2017 around 10.00 a.m. the boy told mother that the uncle who had given him gift of Rs.20/- would be giving bat and ball to him on that day and, therefore, he went outside the house. He did not return till 12.00 noon and, therefore, mother started searching for him. She went to the house of the friends of her son, but then those friends told her that her son had gone alone to Idgah Maidan and they had not accompanied the said boy. The informant and her relatives took search of the boy in an around Idgah Maidan. But they could not trace him out nor they could find any other person there. Therefore, she lodged First Information Report contending that her son has been kidnapped. The said First Information Report came to be registered vide Crime No.415/2017 under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is the further prosecution story that on 26.10.2017 a phone call was received by the husband of the informant around 6.45 p.m. The boy talked to father and it was told that the mobile was of unknown persons and persons who took the boy along with them demanded ransom of Rs.20,00,000/- for the safe release of the son. They had then also threatened that they would kill the son if their demand is not fulfilled. Thereafter the father of the victim son contacted police and made some arrangements for the money and as he was called to Hyderabad, he went along with police party to Hyderabad, but before that he was then called to Vikharabad. On their way they were called to Udgir from Vikharabad and accordingly, the father went along with police persons to Udgir. The ransom amount was settled by the caller to Rs.8,00,000/-. At Udgir, Dist. Latur the father was called at 2-3 places by the caller. The last place, where he was called, was the railway crossing. He was directed by the caller to keep the bag of the money on one platform i.e. ota near the railway crossing. After the bag was put, one person picked up that money bag and the police persons nabbed him. Information was taken from that person about the son of the informant and then it was found that the son was along with another man standing nearby. That man was also caught hold of by the police and the victim son was given in the custody of his father. Supplementary statements were recorded, panchnama was carried out even at that place, accused came to be arrested and after the investigation was completed charge sheet was filed for the offence punishable under Section 364-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. After the committal of the case charge came to be
The prosecution must prove the essential elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A requires proof of abduction and threats of death or harm, which was established in this case.
The judgment emphasizes the requirement to establish essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving coercion and threat.
The ingredients of Section 364A IPC and the principles governing the proof of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B IPC.
Prosecution has not been able to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt, for committing an offence under Section 364(A) IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for admissible evidence to prove the essential elements of criminal offences, emphasizing the importance of meeting the evidentiary....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.