2019 Cri L J 888 (Meg) ::2019 CRI. L. J. 888 ::AIROnline 2018 Meg 149 ::(2018) 4 Gau LT 930 ::(2019) 193 AllIndCas 753 (MEG)

Meghalaya High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): Mohammad Yaqoob Mir , C.J. AND S. R. Sen , J

(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.364A, S.302— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.65B(4)— Kidnapping for ransom and murder - Ransom call records - Reliability - Though father of victim initially stated about receipt of ransom call on his mobile phone, he subsequently stated that ransom call received on phone of his friend - Mobile phone on which ransom calls received, not seized by Investigating Officer - Friend of father of victim, though firstly received ransom call, not examined as witness at all - Call Details Record (CDR) of phone on which ransom call received neither obtained in accordance with provisions of S. 65-B of Act nor proved before Court - In absence of vital link, details of ransom call cannot be proved - Fact that father of victim ever received ransom call, not established. (Para 18 19 20 22) (B) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.364A, S.302— Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.156— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.27— Kidnapping for ransom and murder - Recovery of mobile phone of accused - Investigating Officers deposed that mobile phone used by accused to make ransom call allegedly recovered from toilet of police station- Contradiction in statements of constables regarding place of recovery - One constable stated recovery of cell ph....