SUNDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing these two appeals, the appellants Sunder and Ajay have impugned the judgment dated 20th November, 2014 and order on sentence dated 22nd November, 2014 whereby the appellant Sunder has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and appellant Ajay @ Kalia has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC read with Section 109 IPC and sentenced as under: Appellant Sunder U/S 376 IPC : to undergo RI for ten years with fine of 20,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo RI for two years. Appellant Ajay @ Kalia U/S 376 IPC R/w : to undergo RI for ten years with fine of 20,000/ - and in default of payment Section 109 IPC of fine, to undergo RI for two years. In brief the prosecution case is that on 21 st April, 2011, the

(2.) complainant Raj Singh came to the police station to lodge missing report about his daughter 'R' (name withheld to conceal the identity), aged about 17 years who had been missing since previous year i.e. October, 2010. He informed the police that he suspected one Mehar Chand, S/o Jug Lal, Mobile No. 08053950262 to be behind missing of her daughter and prayed for legal action against him.

(3.) During investigation, search for the missing girl was made and she was recovered, along with both the accused persons from Railway Station, Narela, Delhi. While prosecutrix was sent for medical examination, both the appellants were arrested and they were also got medically examined. The prosecutrix was also produced before the learned Magistrate for getting her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, the appellants were sent to face trial for committing offence punishable under Section 363/365/375/34 IPC.