AMIT PRATAP Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners impugn the order dated 16 th April, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge modifying the charge against the Petitioners to one for offence under Sections 364A IPC and 120B IPC instead of Sections 115/118 read with 34 IPC. The learned Trial Court vide the impugned order noted that the charge under Sections 115/118 read with Section 34 IPC as framed against the Petitioner on 4 th April, 2005 had become final as the said order was not challenged. Even during arguments before the learned Trial Court it was conceded by the learned counsels for the Petitioners that under Section 216 Cr.P.C. the Court can amend the charge however, no order on discharge can be passed. Thus it has to be decided whether the Petitioners should continue for charges under Sections 364A IPC and 120B IPC or under Sections 115/118 IPC read with 34 IPC or be discharged.

(2.) In nutshell the case of the prosecution is that a complaint was lodged by Vimal Chadha at police station Ashok Vihar that his 20 years old son Prakh Chadha @ Sunny, who had gone out with his friends on 18 th January, 2003, had not returned and was missing. Subsequent to the registration of the FIR No. 34/2003, a ransom call was received on 19 th January, 2003. Since the family and the police suspected accused Vikas Chaudhary for having committed the offence, his landline phone number and mobile number were put under interception after seeking requisite permission. The ransom calls continued and last of the ransom calls made to the Complainant was on 11 th March, 2003 by Vikas Chaudhary even though the Complainant s son Prakh Chadha had been murdered on 18 th January, 2003 itself.

(3.) The role assigned to the Petitioners is that they allegedly joined the conspiracy later on and participated in demanding the ransom as they were also promised a share in the ransom amount. The Petitioners and the other co-accused were arrested on 4 th May, 2003. A charge sheet was filed against all the five accused persons for committing the offences punishable under Sections 364/302/201 read with Section 120B IPC. Initially vide order dated 4 th April, 2005 charges under Sections 364A/302/201/120B IPC were framed against the co-accused Vikas Sidhu, Vikas Chaudhary and Joginder, whereas against the Petitioners charges for commission of offences punishable under Sections 115/118/34 IPC were framed.