Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajiv Sharma, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.
Prince - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRA-D No. 1666-DB of 2015 (O&M), 54, 66, 782-DB of 2016 (O&M), CRR No. 53 of 2016 (O&M)
Decided On : 27-01-2020
Ransom - Criminal Law - IPC 302, 201, 364-A, 120-B, 506 - The judgment disposed of appeals and revision arising from a common incident. The appellants were charged with and tried for various offences including murder, kidnapping, and criminal conspiracy. The prosecution's case revolved around the kidnapping of the complainant's son and subsequent ransom demands. The prosecution presented witness testimonies and call details to establish the guilt of the accused. However, the court found several inconsistencies and lack of conclusive evidence, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution's case centered on the kidnapping of the complainant's son and subsequent ransom demands. The complainant's son went missing while playing outside his house, and the complainant received ransom calls demanding a large sum of money. The prosecution presented witness testimonies and call details to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found several inconsistencies and lack of conclusive evidence in the prosecution's case. The court noted that the call details were not exhibited, ownership of the mobile phone was not proved, and the arrests and recoveries were made without independent witnesses. As a result, the court acquitted the appellants of the charges, giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Issues: The key issues in the case revolved around the sufficiency and reliability of the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and call details. The court also considered the lack of conclusive proof regarding the ownership of the mobile phone and the absence of independent witnesses during arrests and recoveries.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to acquit the appellants was based on the lack of conclusive evidence and several inconsistencies in the prosecution's case. The court emphasized the importance of fully proving all circumstances in a case based on circumstantial evidence and the need for a complete chain of evidence to exclude every hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants of the charges, giving them the benefit of the doubt. The appellants, except appellant Sarabjit Kaur, who was not in jail, were ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case. The criminal revision filed by the complainant was dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Rajiv Sharma, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of the aforesaid appeals and revision as the same arise out of a common incident.
2. The aforesaid appeals and revision are instituted against the judgment dated 7.10.2015 and order dated 14.10.2015, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, in Session Case No. 17302 of 2012. Appellants Sukhchain Singh alias Mintu, Kulwinder Singh alias Kinder, Sarabjit Kaur, Prince and Harpreet Singh alias Happy were charged with and tried for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 364-A, 120-B, 506, 148, 149 IPC. They were convicted and sentenced as under:-
| Name of the appellant | Under Section | Imprisonment |
| 1. Harpreet Singh @ Happy | 302 IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. |
| 364-A IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 120-B IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 201 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 506 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 2. Kulwinder Singh @ Kinder | 302 IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. |
| 364-A IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 120-B IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 201 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 506 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 3. Sukhchain Singh @ Mintu | 302 IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. |
| 364-A IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 120-B IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. | |
| 201 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 506 IPC | To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. | |
| 4. Sarabjit Kaur | 302 IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. |
| 364-A IPC | To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and i | |
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
