GUDDU Vs. STATE N C T OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment dated 25.10.2008 and order of sentence dated 31.10.2008, whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- or to undergo SI for two months in default.

(2.) In the night intervening 7/8 November, 2005, Anand Kumar Jha, father of the prosecutrix, came to PS Subzi Mandi and lodged a report stating therein that his daughter aged about 14 years, who was studying in VII Standard, had on that day gone to hospital, along with her younger brother Govind Jha, at about 9.00 a.m. She was standing in the queue, waiting for her turn. The guard did not allow her brother to go inside and, therefore, he was sitting outside. She, however, did not come out and could not be found. At about 6.00 p.m., she called his neighbour on his telephone and asked as to whether her brother had reached home. The neighbour told her that her brother had reached home. Thereafter she disconnected the call.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that in the night of 11th November, 2005, the appellant Guddu rang up in the neighbourhood and informed that he had taken the prosecutrix with him. This is also the case of the prosecution that on 12th November, 2005, the prosecutrix was recovered in the company of the appellant from House NO.119 in Sector 22 of Noida. In her statement to the Magistrate, the prosecutrix stated that when she came out of the hospital, she could not find her brother. The appellant Guddu, who used to reside in her neighbourhood met her at the gate of the hospital. She sought his help in tracing her brother. The appellant brought her to Nangia Park, from where he took her in a bus on the pretext that her brother could be available in Azad Pur. On the way, he made her get down at a deserted place from where he hired a rickshaw and brought her to ISBT. From ISBT, she was brought to Noida to the house of the sister of the appellant Guddu. She also alleged that in the night of 8th November, 2005, the appellant committed sexual intercourse with her against her consent. She further stated that on 12th November, 2005, she spoke to her mother on telephone and disclosed the place where the appellant had taken her. The police then recovered her from that place.