MAGANT RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against a judgment dated December 22, 1984 of Shir Mahesh Chandra, Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi convicting the appellant for commission of offences punishable under sections 366 and 376 Indian Penal Code and his order dated January 4, 1983 sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 in default of payment of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 366 IPC and further sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 in default of payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 376 IPC. The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Miss Roshni Devi (Public Witness 1) is a daughter of Mattu Ram (Public Witness 3). She was living with her parents in house No. RZC 14, Sagarpur West, New Delhi. The appellant Mangat Ram was residing in house No. RZC-16, Sagarpur West, New Delhi.

(3.) The version of the prosecution briefly is as follows. On June 7, 1983 noon, Roshni Devi was going towards the house of her friend Raj Kurnari living in the neighbourhood. Mangat Ram appellant met her in the way near a temple. He gave some pershad of boondi to Roshni Devi which she took. On taking that pershad she feld giddy. In that state she was taken to a place near a drain on a bicycle. Thereafter she was taken in a car to place near Red Fort. It was only when she was near Red Fort that she regained her consciousness. Then the appellant threatened her that she would be killed unless. She did whatever was told to her. Under that threat she was taken to a temple where rituals of marriage were gone into. By that time it was night. She was taken to a lonely place in a park and subjected to sexual intercourse by the appellant. She wanted to resist but was threatened that if she did so, she would be killed. She was then taken back to the temple where they passed the night. In the morning she was taken to Janakpuri. Matu Ram (Public Witness 3) had gone on his duty. He came back at about 4 p.m. and found his daughter missing. He made a search. Some ladies in the neighbourhood told him that they bad seen Roshni Devi with the appellant.