Back
2022 Supreme(UK) 195
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Mohd. Yunus - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.378, 388, 414, 424, 436 of 2013, 118 of 2014
Decided on : 06-09-2022.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Mr. Ravi Joshi.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amit Bhatt, Adv
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the intent to confine a person secretly and wrongfully for the offense under IPC 365.
Headnote:
Kidnapping - Abduction - IPC 364A, IPC 120B - Summary: The court found the appellants guilty of kidnapping and conspiracy under IPC 365 and IPC 120B, respectively. The court highlighted the absence of evidence regarding the demand of ransom, concluding that IPC 364A was not applicable. The court emphasized the need to prove the intent to confine a person secretly and wrongfully for IPC 365. The judgment of conviction and sentence under IPC 364A and IPC 120B were set aside, and the appellants were convicted under IPC 365 and IPC 120B.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the abduction of the victim, Rajeev Verma, and the subsequent rescue by the police. The appellants were convicted and sentenced by the trial court, leading to their appeal to the higher court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellants guilty of kidnapping and conspiracy under IPC 365 and IPC 120B, respectively, setting aside the previous judgment of conviction and sentence under IPC 364A and IPC 120B.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the applicability of IPC 364A and the intent to confine a person secretly and wrongfully under IPC 365.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the absence of evidence regarding the demand of ransom, leading to the conclusion that IPC 364A was not applicable. Additionally, the court highlighted the need to prove the intent to confine a person secretly and wrongfully for IPC 365.
Final Decision: The judgment of conviction and sentence under IPC 364A and IPC 120B were set aside, and the appellants were convicted under IPC 365 and IPC 120B.
JUDGMENT :
Sri Alok Kumar Verma, J.
All these six appeals have arisen from a common judgment dated 07.09.2013/10.09.2013, passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 126 of 2007, ‘State vs. Mohd. Yunus and 11 Others’, whereby, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 364A of IPC, and, in default of payment of fine, they have been directed to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months, and, they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 120B of IPC, and, in default of payment of fine, they have been further directed to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
2. These six Appeals are connected appeals, therefore, these appeals are being decided by this common judgment. File of Criminal Appeal No.378 of 2013 will be leading file.
3. The prosecution case in brief is, that the informant Ram Saran Verma (PW1) had lodged an FIR (Ext.Ka11) through his written information (Ext.Ka1) that on 11.12.2006 at 09:00 p.m., he received a phone call from his house that his son Rajiv Verma (PW4) had gone to his plot from the house by his motorcycle number UA04B-4366. He (informant) went to his plot. He saw that the motorcycle of Rajiv Verma, but, Rajiv Verma was missing. On enquiry, he came to know that 3-4 persons had come there by black coloured car. He further stated in his written information that about two years back, he had purchased a land. A dispute arose with one Munna Negi alias Mohan Negi, Chandan Negi and Gopal Negi. Therefore, on suspicion, he stated that the said persons abducted his son.
4. The First Information Report was registered against the aforesaid three persons under Section 364 IPC. During the investigation, involvement of the aforesaid three persons was not found.
5. According to the prosecution, one co-accused Brij Mohan Chauhan was arrested on 07.01.2007, who hatched the conspiracy of abduction of Rajiv Verma with other co-accused persons. Brij Mohan Chauhan informed the police that the victim Rajeev Verma (PW4) was abducted. After receiving the information of abduction, the police reached a house, situated in village Sirsol, District Budaun and rescued the victim.
6. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The charges under Sections 364A IPC and 120-B IPC were framed. The accused persons denied the charges and claimed to be tried.
7. The prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses. PW1 Ram Saran Verma is informant and father of the victim. PW2 Smt. Geeta Verma is mother of the victim. PW3 Gopal Verma is the uncle of the victim. PW4 Rajiv Verma is a victim. PW5 Inspector D.C. Dhaundiyal was a member of the raiding party. PW6 Inspector Bhupendra Singh Dhoni and PW7 Sub-Inspector Ram Singh Mehta have corroborated the facts, as stated, by PW5. PW8 S.S.I. R.C. Makholia, and PW9 S.S.I. Harish Bahadur Singh are Investigating Officers.
8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. They denied all the incriminating evidence against them.
9. The appellants have not adduced any defence evidence.
10. After hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence, the learned Trial Court has passed the impugned judgment.
11. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, awarded by the trial court, the appellants appealed to this Court.
12. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
13. The only submission raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the case does not fall under Section 364 A IPC.
14. Mr. Amit Bhatt, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State, fairly conceded that there is no evidence on record regarding the demand of ransom, therefore, the present
