Back
VIVEK RUSIA, BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
Bakar Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dwivedi, J. -- 1. This appeal filed under section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') assails the judgment dated 30.4.2012 in S. T. No.357/2010 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, Dewas whereby the appellant has been found guilty for offence under section 458, 392, read with section 397, 364-A and 429 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I for 10 years with fine of Rs.1,000/- , R.I. For 10 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-, life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- and R.I. for three years respectively with default stipulation.
2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that complainant Smt. S.Parimala Srinivasan (PW-1) on 21.9.2010 lodged an FIR at Police Station Kotwali, Dewas stating that she is residing at Sadashiv Nagar and Principal in Central Academy. Her husband is Director in the Caparo Tube, Dewas. On the fateful day, she and her husband A. Srinivasan (PW-2) were sleeping in the room situated at upper floor of the house. When she woke up hearing barking of the dog, mugger armed with knife was standing by the side of their bed. That person asked for surrendering their money. When the pet dog pounced o
Kidnapping for ransom – Unless all conditions as enumerated in Section 364A of IPC are fulfilled, no conviction can be recorded.
Supreme Court has wide power to alter charge under Section 216 of Cr.P.C. whilst not causing prejudice to accused.
The prosecution must prove both kidnapping and a ransom demand for conviction under Section 364-A; failure to do so warrants only convictions under lesser charges.
The prosecution must prove all elements of Section 364(A) IPC, including a clear connection between the act of hurt and the ransom demand; failure to do so warrants a lesser charge.
Kidnapping for ransom – Conviction and sentence cannot be sustained where prosecution has failed to prove conditions together as envisaged under Section 364-A, IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for admissible evidence to prove the essential elements of criminal offences, emphasizing the importance of meeting the evidentiary....
The prosecution must prove the essential elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
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
