RAJBIR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by Rajbir and Shiv Raj, the appellants herein challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 20.8.1991 and 27.8.1991 whereby the appellant No.l, Rajbir was held guilty of an offence under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to seven years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for three months and whereas the appellant No.2, Shiv Raj was found guilty of an offence under Section 366/34 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years.

(2.) It appears that Shiv Raj, appellant No.2 has already been released from jail after undergoing the sentence awarded to him and,therefore, the appeal on his behalf has not been pursued and pressed. It is only Rajbir, appellant No.l, who has pursued this appeal against his conviction and sentence.

(3.) In brief, the facts of the case as are apparent from the record are that one Babita Sharma, the prosecutrix was living with her parents in H. No. 352, Mangolpur Kalan, Delhi, while Shiv Raj and his wife, Bimla were living in her neighbourhood. Rajbir, appellant No.l the brother of Shiv Raj, appellant No.2 was living in Village Zimani, District Meerut,Uttar Pradesh. As per the prosecution version, Bimla suggested Babita Sharma to marry Rajbir and accordingly Babita Sharma went to the house of Bimla on 7.8.1989 in the morning after informing her parents that she was going to her friend. She accompanied the appellant No.2,Shiv Raj and his wife Bimla to village Zimani. She stayed at that village for about 19 days and that she appeared before the Magistrate in Meeruti and got the marriage with Rajbir appellant No.l registered. As per the case of the prosecution, after that she slept with the appellant No.l for one night and on that night he committed sexual intercourse with her. On 27.8.1989 she came back to Delhi and stayed at the house of Maya Devi in Income Tax Colony, Pitampura, Delhi from where she was recovered by the police and a case was registered on the complaint of the rosecutrix on 27.8.1989 and on that day .the appellant was arrested and prosecuted.