Prempal vs State of U. P. - 2022 Supreme(All) 1057

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(All) 1057

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MANOJ MISRA, SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI, JJ.
Prempal And 2 Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.2175 of 2016
Decided on : 03-08-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Anup Ghosh, Arunkumar Mishra, Ghan Shyam Das, Om Prakash Chaube, Pradeep Kumar Mishra, Pratap Ghosh, Rajendra Kumar Dubey, Santosh Kumar Pandey, Shravan Kumar Mishra

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 364-A, 120-B, and 368 - Arms Act - Section 25 - Criminal appeal against conviction for abduction and arms possession. The trial court convicted appellants for kidnapping for ransom, but discrepancies in time and nature of police operation undermined credibility of evidence. Essential elements of ransom demand and abduction were not proven beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 30-40)

Facts of the case:
Appellants were alleged to have abducted Salman for ransom, motivated by the belief that his father had sold land for Rs.22 lakhs. The police operation recovered Salman, but the circumstances raised doubts about the legitimacy of the operation. (Paras 1-4)

Findings of Court:
The court found the evidence insufficient to support the charges due to inconsistencies and lack of reliability of witnesses, particularly regarding the timing and execution of the police operation. (Paras 30-40)

Issues: Whether the police operation leading to recovery and the alleged ransom demand were credible; whether the evidence met the standard of proof required for conviction. (Paras 26, 30)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, and failures to establish a coherent narrative or credible witnesses resulted in a reasonable doubt about the appellants' guilt. (Paras 30-40)

Result: Appeals allowed; convictions reversed.

Table of Content
1. summary of case background and charges (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. testimony regarding abduction and ransom demand (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. witness credibility and evidential discrepancies (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. arguments for conviction and explanation of motive (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
5. court’s analysis and reasonable doubt on prosecution (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
6. final judgment and acquittal of appellants (Para 40 , 41)

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 04.03.2016 passed by the Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Areas)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Farrukhabad in S.S.T. No.37 of 2015 (arising out of case crime no.553 of 2014, P.S. Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad) connected with (i) S.T. No.135 of 2015 (arising out of Case Crime No.562 of 2014, P.S. Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad); (ii) S.T. 136 of 2015 (arising out of Case Crime No.563 of 2014, P.S. Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad); and (iii) S.T. No.137 of 2015 (arising out of Case Crime No.565 of 2014, P.S. Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad), whereby the appellants Prem Pal, Sipahi Lal and Omveer have been convicted under Sections 364 -A/120-B and 368 IPC in connection with Case Crime No.553 of 2015 (supra) and, in addition to above, Prem Pal and Omveer have also been convicted under Section 25 of the ARMS ACT in connection with Case Crime Nos.563 of 2014 and 565 of 2014 (supra), respectively. Sipahi Lal, Prem Pal and Omveer have been sentenced as follows:-Imprisonment for life as well as fine of Rs.20,000/-to each of the three, coupled with a default sentence of two years, under Section 364 -A read with Section 120-B IPC; and 7 years R.I. as well as fine of Rs.10,000/-to each of the three, coupled with a sentence of two years, under Section 368 IPC. Whereas, Prem Pal and Omveer have also been sentenced to imprisonment of three years R.I. as well as fine of Rs.5,000/-, coupled with a sentence of two years each, under Section 25 of the ARMS ACT . All sentences to run concurrently. As all these appellants were in jail during the course of trial, it was observed that the time spent in jail by the appellants shall be counted/adjusted against the sentence awarded.

2. In S.S.T. No.37 of 2015, seven persons, namely, Sipahi Lal (appellant no.2), Prem Pal (appellant no.1), Omveer (appellant no.3), Ramu alias Raju, Ram Kishore, Smt. Malti and Smt. Santoshi were tried in connection with Case Crime No.553 of 2014 (supra). Out of those seven persons, four, namely, Ramu alias Raju, Ram Kishore, Smt. Malti and Smt. Santoshi, were acquitted. Whereas, in S.T. No.135 of 2014, arising out of Case Crime No.562 of 2014 (supra), four persons, namely, Prem Pal (appellant no.1), Ram Kishore, Ramu alias Raju and Omveer (appellant no.3) were tried. All four were acquitted. This appeal, therefore, is confined to the judgment and order of conviction of the appellants to the extent indicated above in S.T. No.37 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.553 of 2014 (supra); S.T. No.136 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.563 of 2014 (supra); and S.T. No.137 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.565 of 2014(supra).

INTRODUCTORY FACTS

3. On 12.12.2014, at 12.30 hours, Chheda Khan (PW-1) submitted a written missing report (Ex. Ka-1) alleging that in the night of 11/12.12.2014 his son Salman and Kunwarpal son of Siyaram, at about 2 am, had gone to village Amaliya Mukeri on their tractor but they did not return. (Note: Kunwarpal is real brother of Prempalappellant no.1). A GD entry of the missing report was made vide Report No.27 (Ex. Ka-2), at P.S. Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad.

On 15.12.2014 information was given by PW-1 that his son (Salman) and Kunwarpal appear to have been abducted. Consequently, vide GD Entry No.45, at 17.45 hours, the missing report was converted into Case Crime No.553 of 2014 under Section 364 IPC. On 16.12.2014, investigating officer (I.O.) Meghnath Singh -PW-6 recorded the sta