In Brief
Eleven appellants were convicted for kidnapping three businessmen for ransom, holding them in confinement for up to 52 days while demanding Rs. 50 lakhs. The Supreme Court upheld all convictions under Section 364A/34 IPC and Dacoity (Section 395 IPC), rejecting arguments that ransom was not properly demanded or that identification was weak. The Court held that ransom demand can be made informally (via mobile calls, letters written during captivity, circumstantial evidence); that test identification parades conducted before magistrates constitute substantive evidence; and that under Section 34 IPC, accused providing logistical support are equally liable. It confirmed the High Court's modification of sentences from death and life imprisonment to uniform 20-year rigorous imprisonment, treating life imprisonment as actual lifetime incarceration. All appeals dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.