NANAK CHAND Vs. RAM KISHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. the appellant/complainant of F.I.R. No. 53/2008 under Sections 363/364/34 IPC registered at PS Mangol Puri challenges the order dated February 05, 2014 acquitting the respondents of the charges framed against them. Nanak Chand assails the judgment on the ground that the learned Trial Court erroneously acquitted the respondents failing to appreciate that Nanak Chand was under the fear of his life and property at the hands of accused receiving threatening calls and thus he did not lodge any complaint immediately after the kidnapping. The learned Trial Court overlooked the statement of child Raj Kumar recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which clearly implicated the respondents and deposed as to how he came out of the clutches of the respondents.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

(3.) AS noted above there was considerable delay in lodging of F.I.R., even much after the kidnapped child came back to his home. There is no evidence to show that the pressure or fear was lurking large on the complainant even after his son had come back to his house on January 19, 2008. Though a telephone call has been deposed to be made to the father by the conductor, however neither the conductor has been brought in the witness box nor the telephone records exhibited. As against this, defence has examined two witnesses DW -1 Ram Bharose the brother -in -law of Nanak Chand and DW -2 Sunita his wife.