1. This criminal appeal under Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita read with Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the appellant/complainant. It is directed against the impugned judgment dated 03/09/2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Tehsil Badnagar, District Ujjain. The said judgment was rendered in Sessions Trial No. 30/2022.

2. By the impugned judgment, the Trial Court acquitted respondents no. 2 and 3 of the offences punishable under Sections 363/34, 365/34, 506 Part 2, 327, and 386 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the Trial Court convicted both the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. For the aforesaid conviction, the respondents were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. The appellant seeks to set aside the acquittal and prays for their conviction under all charged sections.

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16/05/2022 at around 8:00 p.m., the appellant received a phone call on his mobile from an unknown number. The caller asked the appellant to come outside his house. Upon going downstairs, the appellant met a boy whom he had seen a few days prior, accompanied by a co-accused at the colony gate.

4. It is alleged that the accused persons forcibly took the appellant to Adinath Villa Colony, situated opposite the grid on Runija Road, Badnagar, and demanded money. When the appellant refused to fulfill their illegal demand, the accused persons allegedly snatched his mobile phone from his pocket. They then assaulted the appellant with a belt, fists, and kicks.

5. The alleged assault resulted in injuries to the back, shoulder, and right hand of the appellant. When the appellant raised a hue and cry, both accused fled on a motorcycle, threatening to kill him if he reported the matter. Thereafter, the appellant lodged an FIR at Police Station Badnagar along with his father and uncle.

6. Based on the said complaint, Crime No. 273/2022 was registered and the matter was investigated. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. Charges were framed against respondents no. 2 and 3, and after the conclusion of the trial, the impugned judgment was passed.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

7. Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court is against the settled principles of law. It is argued that the Trial Court erroneously ignored the facts and circumstances of the case. The evidence on record was not appreciated correctly before passing the impugned judgment of acquittal.

8. It is further contended that the prosecution was successful in proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The testimonies of all prosecution witnesses clearly established that respondents no. 2 and 3 forcibly took the appellant to extort money. The Trial Court wrongly acquitted the respondents by ignoring these crucial witness testimonies.

9. The counsel submits that the acquittal was merely a result of lacunas in the police investigation, specifically the failure to prepare a spot map of Adinath Colony. It is also argued that despite documentary evidence regarding the appellant's age, the prosecution's failure to secure such documents led to a wrongful acquittal under Section 363 of the IPC.

10. It is additionally urged that the Trial Court ought to have appreciated the evidence within the purview of Section 362 read with Section 364A of the IPC. The counsel contends that the medical report (Exhibit P-11) clearly proves the injuries caused by a belt and kicks, thereby proving the offence under Section 327 of the IPC beyond doubt.

11. Lastly, it is submitted that the appeal has been filed within the prescribed period of limitation. The application for the certified copy was submitted on 17/10/2025 and it was delivered to the appellant on 06/11/2025. Hence, it is prayed that the appeal be allowed and the respondents be convicted for all the major offences.

CONTENTIONS OF THE STATE

12. Counsel for the State/respondent has opposed the present appeal. It is submitted that the Trial Court has passed a well-reasoned judgment based on a proper appreciation of the evidence. There is no illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by the Trial Court warranting appellate interference.

13. It is further argued by the State that the prosecution failed to prove the exact place of the incident and the core allegation of wrongful confinement. The Trial Court has rightly convicted the respondents only for the proven offence of voluntarily causing hurt based on the medical evidence. Hence, the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

14. This Court has meticulously perused the record and considered the submissions of the parties.

15. While dealing with the evidence regarding the identification of the accused and the registration of the FIR against unknown persons, the Trial Court has appropriately observed that as per Exhibit P-1, the FIR was initially registered against two unknown boys associated with the mobile number 9685101896.

16. The Trial Court noted that the incident occurred on May 16, 2022, at 8:00 PM, and the FIR was lodged at 1:00 AM on May 17, 2022. It was observed that although witness Ganesh Rawal did not know the accused beforehand, his son Aditya successfully identified the accused persons at the police station upon their arrest on May 19, 2022, even though no formal identification parade was conducted by the investigating agency.

17. The Trial Court held that a test identification parade is not substantive evidence. Such proceedings are merely used as corroborative evidence to support the substantive identification made by a witness during their deposition before the Court.

18. The Trial Court rightly concluded that the complainant was already acquainted with the accused Asif. Since the accused were present at the scene, committed the incident, and were clearly identified by the injured victim before the Court, the mere failure of the police to conduct an identification parade during the investigation does not adversely affect the prosecution's case.

19. Furthermore, regarding the failure of the prosecution to prove the location of the incident, wrongful confinement, and extortion, the Trial Court recorded a clear and categorical finding. It was observed that the prosecution failed to produce any spot map of Adinath Colony to corroborate the geographical details of the alleged crime.

20. The Trial Court found that there was no substantive evidence from the complainant, his father, or the witness Shravan Sharma to establish that Aditya was taken to or held in wrongful confinement at any specific place in Adinath Colony. Consequently, the prosecution's narrative regarding the secret confinement, illegal demand of money, and criminal intimidation was deemed unbelievable.

21. In light of these evidentiary gaps, the Trial Court correctly held that the major charges framed under Sections 365, 327, 386, and 506 Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

22. However, the Trial Court appropriately appreciated that the examined evidence clearly established a common intention among the accused to commit assault. It was conclusively proved that in furtherance of this intention, the accused assaulted Aditya with a belt and kicks, which is fully corroborated by the injuries documented in the medical report (Exhibit P-11).

23. Therefore, the Trial Court rightly concluded that based on the material available on record, only the charge for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was conclusively proved against the accused persons beyond any reasonable doubt.

24. On a careful evaluation of the afore-extracted findings, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has committed no infirmity. The failure of the prosecution to prepare a spot map and conclusively prove the exact place of wrongful confinement creates a substantial dent in the allegations of extortion and kidnapping.

25. The medical evidence on record, specifically Exhibit P-11, has been correctly appreciated by the Trial Court to sustain the conviction for voluntarily causing hurt. The findings of the Trial Court are well- reasoned, based on a proper marshaling of the evidence, and do not suffer from any perversity or illegality warranting appellate interference.

26. Consequently, the impugned judgment dated 03/09/2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Tehsil Badnagar, District Ujjain, is hereby affirmed. The conviction and sentence awarded to the respondents under Section 323/34 of the IPC are upheld, as is their acquittal for the remaining offences.

27. Resultantly, the present criminal appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. Let a copy of this judgment, along with the original record, be transmitted to the Trial Court for information and necessary compliance.