Sections 5 36 36 and 5 365 A re-evaluation of abduction and abduction for ransom was imposed under Section 656565, reducing the PPC and the sentence to years. The reasons that the High Court found in favor of rejecting the conviction under Section High65 AA, PPC, was the middle man who received the ransom money for subsequent transfer to the accused. No witnesses. Nothing was brought into evidence where the ransom money was received or borrowed and the bank from which the money was withdrawn was not presented to the manager and the payment of the money was without any doubt. No, such observations of the High Court were not speculative, unrealistic and reflective. It was not the prosecution's duty to read the material evidence as a sanction to the middle man or to explain where the ransom money was withdrawn. Was or was to be presented to the bank manager, approval of money was not necessary to prove Section 6565 AA, the accused kidnapped two persons The purpose of the kiln extortion and complaining kidnappers were forced to comply with the demand for cash / ransom to release. The Supreme Court had set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the High Court and allowed the appeal to be rescheduled for trial. \ R \ n
