Raj Kishore v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeals against life sentences for kidnapping a six-year-old for ransom. The High Court upheld the conviction, clarifying that Section 364-A IPC is satisfied by threats made to the guardian rather than the child, and dismissed pleas for reduced sentences.
What did the court decide?
The appeals were dismissed and the impugned judgment and order of sentence were confirmed.
What the court decided
$~3 to 5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- CRL.A. 1337/2013
MANISH CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Aishwarya Rao, Advocate. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for State 4 + CRL.A. 1369/2013 DAL CHAND ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Biswajit Kumar Patra and Mr. Syed Meesam, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for State 5 + CRL.A. 716/2014 RAJ KISHORE ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu, Advocate (DHCLSC) Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for State
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
Crl.A. Nos. 1337/2013, 1369/2013 & 716/2014 Page 1 of 18
JUDGMENT % 05.04.2018
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. :
- These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 8th July, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North West-II, Rohini Courts in Sessions Case No. 63/2013 arising out of FIR No. 179/2011 registered at Police Station („PS‟) Adarsh Nagar convicting the Appellants for the offence under Section 364-A read with 120-B IPC and the order on sentence dated 16th July, 2013 whereby each of them were sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment („RI‟) for life with the fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment („SI‟) for the period of one month for the aforementioned offence.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the lack of cross-examination of a child witness precluded conviction for abduction and ransom.
Whether a threat to cause death or hurt to an abducted child satisfies the ingredients of kidnapping for ransom under Section 364-A IPC.
Whether the appellants' youth and lack of criminal record warranted a sentence less than life imprisonment under Section 364-A IPC.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
MANISH CHAND
- appellant
DAL CHAND
- appellant
RAJ KISHORE
- respondent
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court