Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.35 seconds)Section 13 in The M.P. Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 [Entire Act]
The Arms Act, 1959
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 365 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 9 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Ravi Dhingra vs The State Of Haryana on 1 March, 2023
25. In the instant case, as discussed earlier, there is nothing material on
record to suggest that the conduct of the appellant Uttam or any of the
abductors gave rise to a reasonable apprehension that the abductee may be
put to death or hurt. Therefore, considering the law laid down by the Apex
33
Court in the case of Ravi Dhingra Vs. The State of Haryana, 2023
(Supra), it is apparent that neither second nor third ingredient of Section
364A of the IPC is fulfilled in the matter. Hence, the facts, in this case, do
not attract the offence under Section 364A of the IPC and learned Trial
Court has committed error in holding the appellant Uttam guilty for the
offence punishable u/S 364A of IPC. As this fact has already been found
proved that abductee Gaurav was abducted and detained/ kept captivated in
the forest secretally for about 15 days by the appellant Uttam and other
abductors, hence, it would be just and proper to modify the conviction of the
appellant Uttam from Section 364A to Section 365 of the IPC.