SEWAK RAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is di-rected against the judgment and order dated 24.2.1994 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Sessions Trial No. 135/1990 convicting the accused/appellant for the offences punish-able under Sections 366 and 376(A) IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprison-ment for five years with fine of Rs. 300 under Section 366 and rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.400 under Section 376(A) IPC plus default stipulations.

(2.) Facts of the case in brief are that on 9.12.1989 at about 9 p.m. FIR Ex. P4 was lodged by Panchram (PW5) alleging that on that day at about 5.30 p.m. when he was returning along with the prosecutrix (PW4) and his son on bicycle and when reached near the Gunargoad locality, accused/appellant who was already standing there, stopped him and took away the prosecutrix and his son with him by making them sit on his bicycle. It is alleged that the accused/appellant is the first husband of the prosecutrix but in observance of the local cus-tom known as "Choodi Pratha" the prosecutrix remarried the complainant (PW5) and parted with the company of the accused/appellant. It is alleged that the complainant Panchram was under obligation to pay certain amount as com-pensation to the accused/appellant in lieu of marrying the prosecutrix and as the said amount was not given to him, he took away the pros-ecutrix with him. Based on this FIR, offences under Sections 341, 342 and 366 IPC were reg-istered against him. After completion of investi-gation, challan was filed by the police for the offences under Sections 366,376, 341 and 342 IPC. However, the Court below framed the charge only under sections 366 and 376 IPC.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, prosecution has examined 7 witnesses in sup-port of its case. Statement of the accused/ap-pellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. This apart, one Phool Singh (DW1) has also been examined by the defence in sup-port of its case.