SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Del) 1143

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S.P. GARG, C. HARI SHANKAR, JJ.
Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Takshak – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Crl. Appeal Nos. 1197 of 2016, 66, 341 of 2017
Decided On : 09-05-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ms. Sima Gulati, Mr. Sumit Soni.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajat Katyal.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on witness testimony, recovery of the victim, and evidence to affirm the conviction for kidnapping and related offences.

Headnote:

Kidnapping - Criminal Law - IPC 120-B, 364-A/365/394 - The judgment discusses the prosecution's case of kidnapping for ransom, the recovery of the victim, and the evidence against the appellants. The court affirms the conviction and modifies the sentence for the offences under IPC 364A/365 and 394.

Fact of the Case:

The prosecution alleged that the appellants kidnapped the victim for ransom. The victim's father received a call informing about the kidnapping and ransom demand. The victim was recovered from a house in a village, and the appellants were convicted for the offences.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellants guilty based on the victim's testimony, recovery of the victim, and witness statements. The court affirmed the conviction and modified the sentence for the offences.

Issues: The issues revolved around the authenticity of evidence, discrepancies in call detail records, and the recovery of the victim. The defense raised concerns about false implication and inconsistencies in witness testimonies.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the victim's testimony, witness statements, and recovery of the victim to establish the guilt of the appellants. The court also addressed discrepancies in evidence and upheld the conviction based on the prosecution's case.

Final Decision: The court affirmed the conviction and modified the sentence for the offences under IPC 364A/365 and 394. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, and the trial court record was to be sent back with the copy of the order.

JUDGMENT :

S.P. GARG, J.

1. The appellants Ajay Kumar (A-1), Jitender Kumar @ Jitu (A-2) and Vijay Phogat (A-3) are aggrieved by a judgment dated 31.08.2016 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 76/14 arising out of FIR No. 183/2009 registered at police station Tilak Marg whereby they all have been held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 120-B IPC, 364-A/365/394 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC. A-3 was further convicted for commission of offence under Section 25 Arms Act. By an order dated 04.10.2016, the appellants were awarded various prison terms with fine.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-sheet was that on 20.07.2009 at around 1.30 p.m. A-1 took Abhay Garg, his friend/the victim in his car to Gurgaon on the pretext to show him some property. At Gurgaon, they met PW-17 (Satya Narain Jhangu). The victim did not return home that night. Victim’s father PW-2 (Ajay Kumar) made futile attempts to contact him on mobile but it was switched off. On the next morning i.e. 21.07.2009 at around 6.00 a.m. Ajay Kumar received a telephone call from A-1’s wife Nirmal Takshak informing him about the abduction of her husband. Ajay Kumar along with his relatives went to A-1’s residence at Pushp Vihar, to ascertain more facts. On the way to Pushp Vihar at around 8.00 a.m. PW-2 (Ajay Kumar) on his mobile received a telephone call from A-1 informing that he had been released after some financial settlement and warning. He further informed that Abhay Garg was still in the custody of the abductors.

3. On 21.07.2009 on the basis of written complaint (Ex.PW-2/A) of victim’s father-Ajay Kumar, FIR was lodged. Efforts were made to find out the victim but in vain. The complainant suspected A-1’s involvement in the kidnapping of his son.

4. Further case of the prosecution is that during investigation, it was found that Wagon-R in which the victim and A-1 had gone to Gurgaon belonged to A-1’s wife. It was discovered that the assailants had withdrawn some cash from the SBI ATM at Rewari using victim’s cards. On the night intervening 22/23.07.2009, Sub-Inspector Shiv Karan and his team reached SBI ATM at Rewari. As per CCTV footage, an individual wearing a helmet was seen withdrawing money from the SBI ATM at Rewari during 1.05 a.m. till 1.26 a.m. The CCTV footage after converting into a CD was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW-7/C).

5. Further case of the prosecution is that on 23.07.2009 on getting information that vehicle No. DL-3C-AG-8139 was being stopped near Jharsa flyover on the highway, the police team reached there and found the said vehicle parked near the mini market. A-1 was found sitting on the driver’s seat in a drowsy condition. On A-1’s search, a small spiral pocket dairy was found in his pocket; it recorded list of articles required for kidnapping a person. On interrogation, A-1 disclosed that he along with his associates Krishan Kumar (since Proclaimed Offender), A-2 and A-3 had kidnapped the victim and he was in confinement in a house at village Kosli, District Jhajjar, (Haryana). Necessary proceedings were conducted at the spot and A-1 was brought to the police station Chanakyapuri. A rescue team was constituted at the Police Station Chanakyapuri for recovery of the victim at Kosli. The police team along with commandos accompanied with A-1 went to Kosli and from a house therein pointed out by A-1, recovered the victim. A-3 was apprehended at the spot and a country made pistol and two live cartridges were recovered from his possession; these were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW-8/H).

6. The police team left to apprehend Krishan @ Mani at Naya Gaon but he could not be found there. The police team then visited A-2’s village Shahdat Nagar; they were informed that he was residing at Laxman Vihar, Gurgaon. On reaching there, the police team came to know that A-2 had just left that place with the children. They also came to know that A-2 used to live at Sagarpur. A-2 finally su









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top