Back
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH
Lalan Paswan – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. – All these appeals have been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 20.09.2017 and order of sentence dated 22.09.2017 passed by the learned Fast Track Court-I, Rohtas at Sasaram in Sessions Trial No. 482 of 2000 which arose out of Sheosagar (Baddi) P.S. Case No. 0023 of 1997 registered under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’).
2. On the basis of the written information (Exhibit ‘1’ of the informant (PW-6)), a case bearing no. 0023 of 1997 was instituted in Sheosagar Police Station against unknown accused persons under Section 364A IPC. The investigation was taken up and after investigation, the I.O. submitted first charge-sheet bearing no. 08 dated 25.06.1997 and investigation was kept pending against some of the accused. After investigation, police submitted a supplementary charge-sheet against the accused persons under Sections 364A and 120B/34 IPC. Cognizance of the offences was taken on 11.08.1997 whereafter the records were committed to the court of sessions where the charges were framed under Section 364A/34 IPC and explained to the accused persons-appellants who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3. O
For a conviction under Section 364-A IPC, the prosecution must prove both the act of kidnapping and the existence of a threat to cause death or injury, as both elements are conjunctively required by ....
The judgment establishes the importance of witness identification, corroborating evidence, and the interpretation of legal provisions in establishing guilt and upholding convictions in criminal cases....
The court emphasized that lack of essential documentation and procedural compliance invalidates the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused who were convicted of kidnapping for ra....
Conviction under IPC Sections 364(A) and 395 reversed due to witness inconsistencies and insufficient evidence of identity and guilt.
Kidnapping for ransom under Section 364A requires proof of abduction and threats of death or harm, which was established in this case.
The prosecution must prove all elements of the crime, including ransom demand and victim's age, to sustain a conviction under Section 364A IPC.
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
