MOTILAL YADAV versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [2014] 13 S.C.R. 565 · Decided: 25-11-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAMAJIT SEN · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 13 S.C.R. 565 
MOTILAL YADAV 
v. 
STATE OF BIHAR 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2478of2014) 
NOVEMBER 25, 2014 
[VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 364A/34 and 1208/364A - c 
Kidnapping of six year old boy for ransom - Conviction and 
sentence of accused ulss. 364A/34 and 120B/364A by court 
below - On appeal, held: Order pas.sed by the High Court 
was not cryptic or without discussion of evidence on record -
On facts, nbt holding of test identification parade not fatal to o 
the prosecution case - Thus, order passed by High Court 
upheld - Evidence. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: It cannot be said that the impugned order is E 
cryptic and without discussion of evidence on record. 
The High Court in the impugned order discussed the 
evidence on record as to how from the corroboration of 
the statements of the witnesses the entire prosecution 
story and the charge stood proved. The testimony of PW· F 
3, father of the victim is natural as he explained in what 
manner he reached place 'H', and he had enough time 
to identify the accused who accompanied him to the 
persons who took money from him whereafter the victim 
was released. In view thereof, it cannot be said that not G 
holding of test identification parade was fatal for the 
prosecution. [Paras 10, 11, 14)(571-D·E; H; 572-A; 
573-C] 
H 
565 
566 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 
Rama and others v. State of Rajasthan (2002) 4 
SCC 571; Badam Singh v. State of M.P (2003) 
12 SCC 792; Prasad alias Hari Prasad Acharya 
v. State of Karnataka (2009) 3 SCC 17 4: 2009 
(1) SCR 1089; Ram Ratan v. State of Rajasthan 
(2010) 13 SCC 509; Kanan and others v. State of 
Kera/a (1979) 3 SCC 319; Ravi Kumar v. State 
of Rajasthan (2012) 9 SCC 284 : 2012 (10) 
SCR 229; R. Shaji v. State of Kera/a (2013) 14 
SCC 266: 2013 (3) SCR 1172; Ashok Debbarma 
alias Achak Debbarma v. State of Tripura (2014) 
4 sec 747 - referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
(2002) 4 sec 571 
referred to 
Para 8 
(2003) 12 sec 792 
referred to 
Para 8 
2009 (1) SCR 1089 
referred to 
Para 8 
(201 o) 13 sec 509 
referred to 
Para 8 
(1979) 3 sec 319 
referred to 
Para 10 
2012 (10) SCR 229 
referred to 
Para 11 
2013 (3) SCR 1172 
referred to 
Para 12 
(2014) 4 sec 747 
referred to 
Para 14 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal 
Appeal No. 24 78 of 2011. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 05-11-2012 of the 
High Court of Patna in CRLA No. 208 of 2006. 
D.N. Goburdhan(AC), Prabal Bagchi, Abhishek 
Aggarwal, Advs. for the Appellant. 
MOTILAL YADAV v. STATE OF BIHAR 
567 
Redreshwar Singh, Samir Ali Khan Advs. for the A 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against 
judgment and order dated 5.11.2012, passed by the High Court 
B 
of Judicature at Patna, whereby the conviction of the accused-
appellant Motilal Yadav recorded under Section 364A read 
with Section 34 and Section 120B read with Section 364A C 
IPC by learned Additional Sessions Judge, ETC 111, Bhagalpur, 
in Sessions Case No. 1053 of 2003/Trial No. 12 of 2004, is 
affirmed. The accused-appellant, along with other co-accused, 
has been convicted and sentenced to impriso'nment for life 
and directed to pay tine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 364A read D 
with Section 34 IPC, and further sentenced to imprisonment 
for a period of two years under Section 120B read with Section 
364A IPC. 
3. Heard learned amicus curiae for the appellant and 
E 
learned counsel for the respondent. 
4. Prosecution story in brief is that PW-6, Subhash 
Chandra Singh, gave a written information at Police Station, 
Kahalgaon, on 23.4.2002 at 8.05 a.m. that his grandson Sagar F 
Kumar (PW-5) has been kidnappe_d. The informant narrated 
in the written report that the victim (Sagar Kumar), aged six 
years, along with his sister PW-4 Riya Kumari, aged four years, 
was going to St. Joseph NTPC School, Kahalgaon in a 
rickshaw pulled by PW-1 Anil Ram. The informant further told G 
that the rickshaw puller told him that one person came to the 
rickshaw and took the victim after telling him that his father 
was calling him at the railway station. On receiving information, 
the informant immediately rushed to the location where the 
H 
568 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014113 S.C.R. 
A rickshaw puller Anil Ram (PW-1) was waiting for the victim's 
n~turn. An FIR No. 117/2002 was recorded at the police stati
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.