LexP. LIAQUAT ALI KHAN versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 6 S.C.R. 493 P. LIAQUAT ALI KHAN A v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No. 665 of 2006) APRIL 17, 2009 B [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ;] ,j Penal Code, 1860 - s.364A - Alleged kidnapping .of minor child for ransom - Role of accused - Held: On facts, c ' demand of ransom was clearly established - Besides, in terms of the disclosure made by the accused, the child was found confined in a house - Courts below were therefore justified in convicting the accused uls.364A. D ·- According to the prosecution, the appellant kidnapped the three year old daughter of PW2 and ... demanded ransom for releasing her; that he asked PW2 to keep the ransom amount in a bag and place it under a culvert; that PW2 placed a bag under the culvert E whereupon appellant came there and collected the bag and while he was returning back, police officials caught hold of him and in terms of the disclosure made by the appellant, the kidnapped child was found confined in a house. The trial court convicted the appellant under F s.364A IPC. High Court declined to interfere. Hence the present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: s.364-A IPC deals with separate type of G J offence where ransom is a distinguishing feature. In the present case, the demand of ransom by accused- appellant was clearly established and the role played by him was analysed by the trial Court and the High Court. 493 H 494 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R. A Appellant got written Exts. P2 and P3 in regard to his demand for ransom and his house is at a short distance from the house of the victim. The evidence on record shows that in terms of the disclosure made by the accused the child was recovered. The appellant came s near the culvert and picked up the bag containing money. c The prosecution case is that the place was indicated where the bag was to be kept. The appellant's demand for ransom was involved and therefore s.364A has clear · application. [Paras 6 and 8] [497-8-C, F-G] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 665 of 2006. From the Judgment & Order dated 28.01.2006 of the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Criminal D Appeal No. 488/2004. Ranjit Kumar, Guru Krishan Kumar and Srikala Gurukrishna Kumar for the Appellants. I. Venkata Narayana Reddy and Debojit D. Bharathi E Reddy for the Hespondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is F to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant. The learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool found the accused appellant guilty of offence punishable under Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and G sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: P.W.1 is grandfather and PW-2 is father of the victim minor girl- Keerthi. PW-7 is their driver. PW-3 is maid servant, PW- H 5 is the class tec:icher of Nursery class and PW-6 is Principal, P. LIAQUAT ALI KHAN v. STATE OF ANDHRA 495 PRADESH [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] of Sri Lakshmi English Medium School, Kurnool. Keerthi aged A about 3 years was studying in Nursery class of the school. On 03.7.2001 at about 8.30 a.m., PW 7 dropped the girl at the school and at about 8.45 a.m, one person came to her class, informed PW 5 that parents of the child forgot to give syrup to her and on his request, the girl was sent with him to administer B the same. After noticing that the child has been carried away by him, PW 5 instructed PW 3 to stop him. The said person did not stop though cautioned by PW 3 and so, she asked PW .8. who was coming by scooter, to stop that person. 1.tJhen PW 8 stopped him and enquired about the matter, the said person c informed that he was taking the child for administering syrup and saying so, he boarded a bus and went away. Thereafter, PW 3 went to the shop of PW 4 and enquired from him who also informed her about the taking away of the child by the said person. Later, PWs 3 and 5 went to PW 6 and informed about 0 the incident to her, who in turn informed about the incident to the parents of the child. The parents came to the school, searched for the child in N.R. Peta area of Kurnool and surrounding places. PWs 3 and 5 narrated the physical features of the kidnapper. PW-12 registered the case on the bas
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.