Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--------- ---------- S. 365-A----Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7(e)---Kidnapping or abducting for extorting property, valuable security---Act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution witnesses, the Motorway Police officials, who had allegedly recovered the abductee from an abandoned car, had not said a word about abductee telling them the names of the abductors---Complainant and the abductee had named the captors belatedly and offered no explanation as to why the abductee had not disclosed their names immediately on his recovery---Complainant and the abductee had deposed that they had made their statement under S. 161, Cr.P.C. on their return journey to the police station, but same had been negated by the statement of the Investigation Officer, who had categorically stated during his testimony that he had reached the office of the Motorway Police along with the complainant, where he found the abductee, received a computerized statement from the abductee, recorded statements of the complainant and Motorway Police officials under S. 161, Cr.P.C. and received the car from which the abductee had been recovered---Presentation of a written computerized statement by the abductee before the Investigation Officer made a crucial circumstance, which reflected on the truthfulness of the story of his abduction by the accused and recovery by the Motorway Police---Abductee appeared to have made the computerized statement even before he had been recovered so as to involve the accused in the present conspiratorial case---Abductee had contended that he was abducted by the accused from vacant plots and no shop existed there; whereas, the Investigation Officer had categorically stated that there was no vacant plot at the place and there were shops---Abductee had been recovered while his hands and legs were tied with ropes and mouth gagged with a piece of cloth/parna, which could be the job done by a friend or foe---Recovery of the rope and parna might have corroborated and given strength to the prosecution case, had the evidence of the abductee and the complainant stood the test of cross-examination---Impugned conviction/sentence was,…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492