Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
G.S. SISTANI, SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, JJ.
Ashish Uppal @ Ashu & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Crl. A. 58, 1240, 27 of 2011; 1422 of 2010; 1384 of 2013; 890 of 2012
Decided On : 10-07-2017
The court upheld the conviction of four appellants for kidnapping for ransom and acquitted two other appellants and the respondent in the state appeal. The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the four appellants had conspired to kidnap the victim and had demanded ransom for his release. The court also found that the prosecution had failed to prove the case against the two acquitted appellants and the respondent in the state appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the kidnapping of a businessman from Delhi airport and the subsequent demand for ransom for his release. Six individuals were arrested in connection with the crime, and the trial court convicted four of them under Section 120-B and Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code, which deal with criminal conspiracy and kidnapping for ransom, respectively. The remaining two accused were acquitted.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the four appellants had conspired to kidnap the victim and had demanded ransom for his release. The court also found that the prosecution had failed to prove the case against the two acquitted appellants and the respondent in the state appeal.
Issues: The main issues in the case were whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the four appellants had conspired to kidnap the victim and had demanded ransom for his release, and whether the prosecution had proved the case against the two acquitted appellants and the respondent in the state appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the four appellants had conspired to kidnap the victim and had demanded ransom for his release. The court also held that the prosecution had failed to prove the case against the two acquitted appellants and the respondent in the state appeal.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction of the four appellants and acquitted the two other appellants and the respondent in the state appeal.
G. S. Sistani, J.
1. All the present six appeals are set down together for final hearing and disposal. The aforesaid five appeals filed by the appellants convicted by the trial Court and one appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of the respondent Mukul Yadav, were heard together, as they arise out of a common judgment and hence, are being disposed of by a common judgment.
2. Present five appeals being Crl.A.No.1422/2010, 27/2011, 58/2011, 1240/2011 and 1384/2013 have been filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the appellants and are directed against the judgment dated 20.10.2010 and order on sentence dated 27.10.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 79/2008 convicting the appellants under Section 120-B and Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for each offence and in default of payment of fine the appellants shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. It was further ordered that the sentence of imprisonment imposed herein above shall run concurrently.
3. The facts, as noticed by the trial Court, which are necessary for the disposal of the present appeals are as under:
“1. On 27.06.2007, an information was received by the crime branch, Delhi, from Inspector Tarun Barot, District Crime Branch, Gaikwad Haveli, Ahmadabad, that one Raju Bhai Malvi, came to Delhi from Ahemedabad, via air flight, was abducted from Delhi airport and that the brother of Raju Bhai Malvi received ransom calls, on his mobile phone, from the mobile phone of his abducted brother Raju Bhai. This case, thus, relates to 3 for ransom.
2. On 03.07.2007, SI Sanjeev Kumar was present at Gurgaon. HC Ajmer reached there and handed over Zero FIR of District Crime Branch, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, to SI Sanjeev Kumar. The said zero FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Shyam Bhai Malvi. Thereupon, SI Sanjeev Kumar made his endorsement and sent HC Rajeev to PS Palam Airport for registration of the case u/s 364-A, 368 and 120-B IPC.
3. Case of the prosecution is that Raju Bhai Malvi, who looks after the business of H.K Malvi Industries at Odhav, went to Delhi for business purpose in the night of 25.06.2007, from Ahmadabad Airport.
4. That on 26.06.2007, at about 3 pm, one person, namely, Asgar Ali telephoned the complainant Shyam Bhai at his mobile phone from his brother Raju’s mobile No. 9825440732 and told that his brother had been kidnapped as he had got “supari” for his brother. That the kidnapper further told him to immediately rush to Ahmadabad and that he may telephone him between 8 am to 8:30 am.
5. That thereafter, complainant Shyam Lal reached Ahmadabad and reported the matter to the police. That on 27.06.2007, at about 4 am, the complainant received a phone call from Asgar Ali who made call from his brother’s mobile and asked the complainant to bring ransom of Rs. 1.5 crores. On which, complainant said that he was unable to arrange so much money as they were not such big people, but, the brother of the complainant was told by the caller to bring whatever they want otherwise, they would kill the brother by next morning.
6. That Asgar Ali then took the phone from Raju Malvi and asked the complainant to bring Rs. 1 crore to Delhi otherwise, his brother would be killed and then disconnected the phone.
7. The complainant, in the meanwhile, suspected Sandeep Parmar @ Sandy @ Bunty, who was later on apprehended from Gurgaon and who disclosed that he alongwith his friends conspired and executed abduction of Raju Bhai Malvi and that they kept Raju Bhai Malvi blind folded in a rented flat at U-5/45, DLF-III, Gurgaon, Haryana and two of his associates Sandeep Singh @ Guddu and Ashish Uppal were guarding him.
8. That a raid was conducted at U-5/45, DLF-III, Gurgaon, Accused Ashish Uppal @ Ashu and Sandeep Singh @ Guddu were found guarding the captive Raju Bh
AI
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
