LAWS(CHH)-2019-6-52

NARAYAN RAO Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On June 17, 2019
NARAYAN RAO Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.4.2013, passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.72/2010, convicting the appellant under Sec. 372 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 05 years & fine of Rs.500.00 and R.I. for 03 years & fine of Rs.500.00 with default stipulations, respectively.

(2.) Case of prosecution, in brief, is this that complainant Yogeshwar Rao Gote (P.W.-8) received information that the appellant, who is Director of Gurukul Ashram, Nandanvan, is illegally trading children in Ashram. He gave intimation to Ruchir Garg (P.W.-17). Thereafter a sting operation was planned and a team was constituted. In the afternoon of 02.03.2010 these witnesses approached the appellant in Ashram and discussed about getting a child of one month. Appellant very clearly made a demand of Rs.2,50,000.00, whereupon Ruchir Garg (P.W.-17) issued a cheque in favour of appellant of Rs.2,50,000.00 drawn on account maintained by him in I.C.I.C.I. Bank. On receipt of cheque, appellant handed-over a female child, who was admitted in the Medical College Hospital at Raipur for care and treatment. Thereafter complainant lodged complaint in Police Station, Urla based on which F.I.R. (Ex.P-9) was registered against the appellant, the investigation was taken-up and after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) The appellant was charged with offence under Sections 372 & 201 of IPC. He denied charges and prayed for trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined 21 witnesses in all. Statement of appellant was recorded under section 313 of Crimial P.C. in which he denied all the incriminating evidence appearing against him in the prosecution case and pleaded innocence and false implication. He examined three witnesses in his defence. After completion of trial, the appellant stands convicted and sentenced in the manner as mentioned hereinabove.