MUNNA LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved with the order dated 9.2.1978 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by which he was convicted under Sections 363 and 366, Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 363 and two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 366, Indian Penal Code. It may be pertinent to mention that the appellant was acquitted for the charge under Section 376, Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that on 8th May, 1976, Lachman Dass Gandhi made a statement to the ASI that his daughter Gulshan Kumari did not return from the school. He had suspicion that his daughter was taken away by one boy named Munna. After investigations, Gulshan Kumari was recovered alongwith Munna. Her statement was recorded by the Sub-Inspector Badrinath in which she stated that her date of birth is 20.7.1957 (19 years at the time of the alleged incidence).

(3.) According to her statement, Munna used to sell Kulfi and she off and on was buying Kulfi from him and during that period she fell in love with him. She further stated that she accompanied him to various places including Gwalior, where she stayed with Munna's brother-in-law. There she was subjected to sexual intercourse against her wishes. The learned Additional Sessions Judge did not convict the petitioner for the charge under Section 376. However, he convicted the appellant under Sections 363 and 366, Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses in respect of this case. I have perused the statements of prosecution witnesses and other material on record. No interference is called for. However, on the question of releasing the appellant on the sentence already undergone, following judgments have been relied upon.