A kidnapping case involving Sachin Garg and the subsequent legal proceedings. The key issues highlighted include procedural flaws, inconsistencies in the investigation, and insufficient evidence presented by the prosecution. The court ultimately acquitted the accused due to these shortcomings, casting serious doubt on the integrity and validity of the investigation and prosecution.

Background and Kidnapping Incident

• Blindfold and Threats: Sachin Garg was blindfolded and threatened with harm to his family if he removed it before ten minutes after release. He was dropped off near Sector 20, Panchkula, and picked up by his father.
• Ransom Narrative: Mahesh Garg (PW-1) corroborated the kidnapping, detailing ransom demands, threats, and the ransom drop-off.
• Aligned Statements: Both Mahesh Garg and Sachin Garg provided aligned statements on key details despite certain inconsistencies and procedural lapses.

Procedural Issues and Delays

• Delay in Statements: Significant delays in recording statements of the victim and key family members weakened the prosecution’s case.
• Fabricated Recoveries: The defense argued that the recoveries were fabricated and the accused were tortured to extract false confessions.
• Lack of Concrete Evidence: The prosecution failed to provide substantial evidence linking SIM cards and calls to the accused.

Identification and Legal Lapses

• Lack of Test Identification Parade: Except for Gaurav Bhalla, there was no TIP for the accused, relying instead on dock identification.
• Improper Invocation of Section 106: The prosecution’s reliance on Section 106 of the Evidence Act was questioned by the defense.

Defense and Acquittal

• Defense Witnesses and Alibi: The defense’s narrative and alibi were not adequately addressed by the prosecution.
• Reasonable Doubt: Procedural lapses and lack of concrete evidence raised reasonable doubt regarding the accused’s involvement.

Court's Decision

• Appeals Allowed: The court found merit in the defense’s submissions and acquitted the accused due to insufficient evidence.
• Judgments Set Aside: Previous judgments by the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Additional Sessions Judge were set aside.

Key Points Issues

1. Initial Lack of Reporting: Delayed reporting of the kidnapping and ransom payment raised authenticity questions.
2. Doubtful FIR Registration: FIR registration was based on unverified secret information.
3. Investigation Doubts: Questionable grounds for investigation, such as unverified mobile numbers and delayed witness statements.
4. Handling of Evidence: Procedural lapses in handling and presenting key evidence.
5. Delay and Fear Explanation: The trial court's justification for delay in filing the FIR was found unconvincing.
6. Non-Examination of Key Witnesses: Failure to examine crucial witnesses weakened the prosecution’s case.
7. Call Detail Records: Reliance on unverified and unauthenticated call detail records.

Key points highlight serious doubts about the investigation and prosecution’s integrity and validity, pointing to possible procedural and evidential shortcomings leading to a miscarriage of justice.