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

2021 Supreme(All) 142

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, JJ.
Akeela @ Sanno @ Aneeta and Another – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1850 of 2014
Decided On : 08-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Deepak K. Jaiswal, Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose), Mohd. Kalim.

Point of Law: Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person or keeps a person in detention after such kidnapping or abduction and threatens to cause death or hurt to such person, or by his conduct gives rise to a reasonable apprehension that such person may be put to death or hurt, or causes hurt or death to such person in order to compel the Government or [any foreign State or international intergovernmental organisation or any other person] to do or abstain from doing any act or to pay a ransom, shall be punishable with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 364-A - Kidnapping for Ransom - Appeal against Judgment and Order - Appeal against Conviction - Facts as culled out from prosecution story are that first informant Misbahul Islam gave a written report at Police Station - Alleging that at about 6 p.m. his housemaid, took his niece aged about one and half year around house and did not return - It is further alleged that she could not traced out even after lot of efforts –

Finding of the Court:

Court held that Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person or keeps a person in detention after such kidnapping or abduction and threatens to cause death or hurt to such person, or by his conduct gives rise to a reasonable apprehension that such person may be put to death or hurt, or causes hurt or death to such person in order to compel Government or to do or abstain from doing any act or to pay a ransom, shall be punishable with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine - We modify the conviction of appellants under Section 364-A I.P.C. to one for offence punishable under Sections 365 I.P.C. Maximum punishment for such offence is seven years only, we modify sentence from life imprisonment to seven years Fine is reduced to Rs. 1,000/- and default sentence is reduced to six months which would start after completion of seven years - Accused shall be entitled to remission as per law –

Result: Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Present appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and order dated 4.4.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 16, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No. 177 of 2010, State vs. Akeela @ Sanno @ Aneeta and Another, arising out of Case Crime No. 212 of 2009 under Section 364-A I.P.C. Police Station Bekanganj, District Kanpur Nagar.

2. The facts as culled out from the prosecution story are that on 20.10.2009, the first informant Misbahul Islam gave a written report at Police Station Bekanganj, District Kanpur Nagar alleging that on 19.10.2009 at about 6 p.m. his housemaid, namely, Sanno @ Akeela took his niece Shifa aged about one and half year around the house and did not return. It is further alleged that she could not traced out even after lot of efforts.

3. On the basis of written report, a case was registered as Case Crime No. 212 of 2009 under Section 364 I.P.C. against the accused-appellant Akeela @ Sanno on the very same day at 10.00 p.m. S.I. Ram Charan Gihar took up the investigation of the matter. The Investigating Officer prepared nakal chik, nakal rapat and also recorded the statement of scribe of the First Information Report. On the pointing out of first informant, he also prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence and started tracing out the kidnapped girl.

4. On 22.10.2013, wife of the first informant Smt. Tahsin Fatima presented a written report with an intent that on 20.10.2009 on her mobile phone no. 9450436353, a call was made from mobile phone no. 9753775687 and the person who rang her told that kidnapped girl was in his custody and for giving her back alive, ransom amounting to Rs. 5 lakhs was asked for. The said application was entered in the G.D. and Section 364 was converted into Section 364-A I.P.C. and investigation was taken up by S.O. S.K. Singh.

5. On receiving information from some informant on 22.10.2013, when Investigating Officer along with police party proceeded on foot towards Yatimkhana crossroads and were 50 paces away from the crossroads, the informant pointing out towards a person standing near the crossroads told that he was the person who was husband of Akeela @ Sanno. The police, at the spur of moment, nabbed that person on the Yatimkhana crossroads itself, who told that his name was Vijay Sharma (accused-appellant no. 2) and admitted that on his instigation, his wife Sanno had kidnapped the girl for ransom of Rs. 5 lakhs and his wife was sitting in China Park behind Community Centre hiding herself. The Investigating Officer nabbed her from the said place from whose custody the kidnapped girl was recovered. He prepared the recovery fard of the girl on the said place and took signatures of public witnesses as well as the police personnel present thereon. He also took signatures of the accused person on the copy of the fard. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the court.

6. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar taking cognizance of the offence, committed the matter to Sessions Court for trial. The Trial Court charged the accused-appellants under Section 364-A I.P.C. who denied the charges and claimed trial.

7. To bring home the charges, the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses, namely, PW-1 Misbahul Islam (first informant and uncle of the kidnapped girl); PW-2 Mohd. Sibtain (father of the informant); PW-3 Sharbat Mufiz (independent witness of recovery of kidnapped girl); PW-4 Tahseen Fatima (wife of the informant); PW-5 Head Constable Devendra Kumar; PW-6 SI Sunil Kumar Singh; PW-7 S.I. Ramcharan Gihar; and PW-8 Rajendra Singh Nagar (witness of recovery of kidnapped girl).

8. PW-1 Misbahul Islam in his examination-in-chief stated that Sanno @ Akeela and her husband Vijay were known to him. Sanno used to do maid work at his home. It was on 19.10.2009 at about 6 p.m. when Sanno @ Akeela took out his niece Shifa aged about one and half year out of the house on the pretext of walking around. When she did not returne for a long time,

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    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