SAJAN ALIAS SONU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL. M. (BAIL) No. 1143/2009 learned counsel for the appellant states that if the appeal is heard for disposal, preferably today itself, she would not press the application which seeks suspension of sentence pending hearing of the appeal.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the State submits that he is prepared to argue the appeal if the learned counsel for the appellant argues the appeal today itself.

(3.) SINCE we are hearing the appeal today itself, we dispose of Crl. M. (Bail)No. 1143/2009 as infructuous. Crl. A. No. 898/2004 1]. Vide impugned judgment and order dated 9. 8. 2004, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 364-A IPC. 2]. Co-accused Sanjay, a juvenile, faced trial before the Juvenile Justice Board and was also convicted, but was let off on probation. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant urges that apart from others, one of the ingredient constituting the offence of kidnapping for ransom is threat or conduct giving rise to a reasonable apprehension that the person kidnapped would be hurt or put to death. Counsel urges that in the instant case the testimony of the witnesses of the prosecution does not bring out that the accused extended any threat to the person or the life of the child who was kidnapped. Counsel urges that there is no evidence of any conduct of the kidnapper wherefrom an apprehension of injury or threat to the life of the child kidnapped could be inferred.