https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197465 The court upheld the conviction of the appellants under Sections 364A, 395, 412, 471, 120B IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The prosecution successfully proved the accused's involvement in the conspiracy to abduct the victim for ransom. Despite issues with the admissibility of call details, the court found the overall evidence, including witness testimonies, to be sufficient. The court accepted the victim's identification of the accused and dismissed claims of political vendetta. The conviction and sentences were upheld, with no interference deemed necessary. en-us Mon, 21 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:10:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197465 The court upheld the conviction of the appellants under Sections 364A, 395, 412, 471, 120B IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The prosecution successfully proved the accused's involvement in the conspiracy to abduct the victim for ransom. Despite issues with the admissibility of call details, the court found the overall evidence, including witness testimonies, to be sufficient. The court accepted the victim's identification of the accused and dismissed claims of political vendetta. The conviction and sentences were upheld, with no interference deemed necessary. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197465