Suman Sood @ Kamal Jeet Kaur Vs. State of Rajasthan - Court Judgment |
SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/677435 |
Subject | Criminal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Decided On | May-14-2007 |
Case Number | Criminal Appeal No. 867 of 2006 |
Judge | C.K. Thakker and; P.K. Balasubramanyan, JJ. |
Reported in | AIR2007SC2774; 2007CriLJ4080; JT2007(9)SC453; 2007(7)SCALE312; (2007)5SCC634; 2007AIRSCW5013; JT2007(7)SC101 |
Acts | Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Sections 4 and 5; Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987; Extradition Act, 1962 - Sections 21; Extradition (Amendment) Act, 1993; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 120A, 120B, 299, 300, 343, 346, 353, 365, 364A, 365, 420, 468 and 471; Constitution of India - Article 32; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 |
Appellant | Suman Sood @ Kamal Jeet Kaur |
Respondent | State of Rajasthan |
Appellant Advocate | Sushil Kumar, Sr. Adv.,; Kamini Jaiswal,; Dasvir Singh Dalee |
Respondent Advocate | Milind Kumar, Adv. for ; Aruneshwar Gupta, Addl. Adv. Gen. |
Prior history | From the Final Judgment and Order dated 20.03.2006 of the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1247 of 2004 |
Books referred | Halsbury's Laws of England, (4th Edn.; Vol. 11; para 58); Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 2002; p.1186; Advanced Law Lexicon, (3rd Edn., p.3932); |
Excerpt:
.....court convicted appellant for offence under sections 365/120b, 343/120b and 346/120b - appeal dismissed by high court - high court further convicted appellant for offence under section 364a/120b - hence, present appeal - facts revealed that appellant was staying in the house where the victim was kept and was all through aware that the victim had been kidnapped and was kept at a secret place - but there was no evidence to connect appellant with the ransom and the alleged demand for the release of terrorist - held, for application of section 364 a the accused should have unlawfully seized a person and then confined a person usually in a secrete place, while attempting to extort ransom - in present case, no evidence at all direct or indirect to connect accused with kidnapping of mr. x.....order71. for the aforesaid reasons, the appeal filed by daya singh deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed and the order of conviction and sentence recorded against him by the trial court and confirmed by the high court is upheld.72. so far as accused suman sood is concerned, an order of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court and upheld by the high court for offences punishable under sections 365/120b, 343/120b and 346/120b, ipc is confirmed and upheld. her conviction and order of sentence for offence punishable under section 364a read with 120b, ipc passed by the high court, however, is set aside and her acquittal for the said offence recorded by the trial court is restored.73. appeals are accordingly disposed of.
Judgment:ORDER
71. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal filed by Daya Singh deserves to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed and the order of conviction and sentence recorded against him by the trial Court and confirmed by the High Court is upheld.
72. So far as accused Suman Sood is concerned, an order of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court and upheld by the High Court for offences punishable under Sections 365/120B, 343/120B and 346/120B, IPC is confirmed and upheld. Her conviction and order of sentence for offence punishable under Section 364A read with 120B, IPC passed by the High Court, however, is set aside and her acquittal for the said offence recorded by the trial Court is restored.
73. Appeals are accordingly disposed of.