PHOOLWATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by a judgment dated 25.11.2014 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.25/13 arising out of FIR No. 718/07 PS Nangloi whereby Phoolwati (A -1), Anil @ Lillu (A -2) were convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 363/366 IPC and Pradeep @ Lala (A -3) was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 363/366/376 IPC, they have filed the instant appeals. By an order dated 27.11.2014, they were awarded various prison terms with fine. The sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge - sheet was that on 22.08.2007 at about 11.00 a.m. near Dispensary Shiv Vihar, Nangloi, Delhi, A -1 and A -2 in furtherance of common intention with A -3 kidnapped the prosecutrix 'X' (changed name) aged around 15 years out of lawful guardianship of her parents. Thereafter, she was taken in a van to Rajasthan where A -3 committed rape upon her during the period from 22.08.2007 to 09.09.2007.

(3.) On 22.08.2007 at around 11.00 a.m. 'X' went missing from her house. Efforts were made by her parents to search her at various places but to no effect. On 24.08.2007, they lodged a 'missing person' report (Ex.PW - 6/A); 'X' was untraceable. On 09.09.2007, she on her own went to Police Station Punjabi Bagh. ASI Mahender Singh from Police Station Nangloi arrived there. After recording victim's statement (Ex.PW -4/A), he lodged First Information Report. 'X' was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Upon completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the appellants in the Court. The prosecution examined nineteen witnesses to establish its case. In 313 Cr.P.C. statements, the appellants denied their involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. The trial resulted in their conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeals have been preferred. It is relevant to note that accused Prahlad who could not be arrested during investigation was kept in column No.2 of the charge -sheet. It is further to be noted that initially A -1 and A -2 were not charge -sheeted and their names were also reflected in column No.2. Subsequently, they were summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. on the application moved by the State.