VIKAS KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant appeal the appellant Vikas Kumar challenges the impugned judgment dated 28th February, 2013 whereby he has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363/366 IPC and the order on sentence dated 8th March, 2013 directing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of four years for the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC along with a fine of Rs.3,000/ -, and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of three months and Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years for the offence punishable under Section 366 IPC with a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - in default of which he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 21st May, 2012 at 4.05 PM the complainant informed that her granddaughter aged 14 1/2 years resident of House No.623, K -Block, Jahangir Puri, height 5 ft, fair complexion, round face, slim body, wearing cream colour top and black pant, whose upper front teeth was broken, was missing from her house since 4.00 A.M. She has been enticed by some unknown person and taken to some unknown place. On the basis of this statement, FIR under Section 363 IPC was registered at PS Jahangir Puri and investigation was handed over to SI Balwant Singh, PW -10 who transmitted messages (Ex.PW -10/A) to all SSPs of India and all SHOs of Delhi. During investigation, he came to know that the prosecutrix and the accused were in District Muzaffarpur, Bihar. SI Balwant Singh along with HC Netra Pal PW4 reached PS Shakra, District Muzaffarpur, Bihar on 29th May, 2012 along with Deepa PW -7 mausi of the prosecutrix. Vikas was arrested on 29th May, 2012. Both of them were identified by Deepa. Statements of prosecutrix, Deepa and Head -constable Netra Pal were recorded. Prosecutrix and Vikas were taken for medical examination to Dr. Krishna Singh, PW -8. In the medical examination, no external and internal injuries were found on the body including private parts of the prosecutrix. On a transit custody remand, Vikas was brought to Delhi.

(3.) Statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C by learned Metropolitan MagistratePW -9 vide Ex.PW9/A. An enquiry regarding age of Vikas was conducted and he was found to be aged between 20 -22 years vide Ex.PW -10/E. After the investigation, Vikas faced trial for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 IPC.