In a landmark legal case, the Supreme Court of India delivered a judgment in the matter of kidnapping and murder, pitting Munawwar against The State of India. The case involved harrowing events leading to the unfortunate demise of the victim and subsequent legal proceedings to bring the culprits to justice. Let’s delve into the details of this significant legal battle for truth and accountability.
Arguments
- The appellant’s argument regarding the delay in recording the FIR was not considered valid by the Court.
- The co-accused and convicts Noor Mohammad and Shamim did not appeal to the Court, while Tahir has passed away.
- The appellant, Munawwar, appealed the sentence he received for murder and kidnapping charges.
- The principle of last seen was invoked, connecting the appellant and others to the victim’s disappearance and subsequent murder.
- The ransom notes received by the victim’s father and the exhumation of the victim’s body were key pieces of evidence in the case.
Analysis
- Noor Mohammad disclosed the location where the dead body of ‘X’ was buried.
- Mohd. Khurshid delayed filing the FIR due to arranging ransom money and perceived threats to ‘X’s life.
- Tahir, along with others, requested time for ransom payment through a letter to PW-1.
- Shamim threw the second ransom note at PW-1’s house and was seen by witnesses PW-4 and PW-5.
- PW-1 identified the involvement of Munawwar, Noor Mohammad, Tahir, and Shamim in ‘X’s kidnapping.
- The dead body of ‘X’ was recovered based on the disclosure statement by Noor Mohammad.
- Mustak affirmed his knowledge of ‘X’ and the events surrounding the kidnapping.
- The dead body of ‘X’ was identified by PW-1 after being exhumed.
- The established facts point towards the guilt of the accused in kidnapping and murder.
- Reliance on judgments of Jaswant Gir vs State of Punjab and State of Goa vs Sanjay Thakran & Another does not support appellant’s submissions
- Direct evidence in the form of ocular testimonies establish appellant’s involvement in kidnapping and captivity
- There was no time gap or interregnum between ‘X’s disappearance and kidnapping; they were simultaneous.
- The appeal was found to hold no merit, and the judgment of the High Court accepting the judgment of the Subsequent evidence was affirmed.
- The conduct of Shamim and Noor Mohammad further implicated and established the charge and case of the prosecution.
Also Read: Judgment in the Case of Sundew Properties Ltd. v. TSERC & APTEL
Decision
- The appellant, Munawwar, was convicted under Sections 302, 365 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
- The appeal was deemed to have no merit and was subsequently dismissed by the Sessions Judge.
Also Read: High Court Judgment on Renewal of Mining Leases: State of Odisha vs. Thakurani Global Processors
Case Title: MUNAWWAR Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001211-001211 / 2014
