Back
NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Suraj Din – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.)
1. Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgement and order dated 1.9.1992 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur in Sessions Trial No.82 of 1989 (State vs. Surajdin and others), convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 365 IPC to undergo one year’s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- with stipulation of default clause.
2. Brief facts of the case, as culled out from the record, are that five named accused persons Surajdin, Sri Narain, Lallu @ Ram Prasad, Ram Kishore and Shiv Shanker, who happens to be son-in-laws and close relatives of the informant, having grudge with the informant Smt. Laxmaniya on account of some land dispute came to her house on 2.12.1988 at about 6.00 a.m. when she alongwith her husband Ghasitey was warming before fire at the door of her house and made assault upon Ghasitey and abducted him in order to kill him. F.I.R. was lodged by Smt. Laxmaniya, wife of Ghasitey on 4.12.1988 at 9.15. a.m.
3. Investigation of the case proceeded. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses, inspected the spot and pre
The court upheld the conviction under Section 365 IPC, emphasizing the importance of prompt FIRs and the admissibility of portions of hostile witness testimonies.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of evidence led to the quashing of the conviction.
To convict under Section 365 IPC, proof of wrongful confinement and abduction must be established; absence of victim's recovery negates conviction.
The need for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and the significance of witness actions in establishing guilt.
Prosecution must prove intent for kidnapping under Section 366 IPC; mere abduction insufficient for conviction, especially when delays and contradictions in victim's testimony exist.
Offence under Section 366 of IPC, 1860 relating to kidnapping/abducting the victim girl by inducing her to compel marriage with him. But the essential ingredients of the offences is that a person bei....
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
