MEHMOOD ALIAS MUDIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 16.4.1977. The accused/appellant faced the trial under Sections 366 and 376 Indian Penal Code The learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the appellant of the charge under section 376 Indian Penal Code but convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 366 and imposed a fine of Rs.200.

(2.) According to the prosecution, in the morning of 12th March, 1975, Tara and Bappo, two minor daughters of Babu Khan went to deliver lunch tiffin to their uncle Munnan at Jama Masjid. While returning, they hired one tonga of one Dhunnia. The appellant was also already sitting in that tonga. The tonga driver took tonga to Shahdara on the instructions of the appellant and both these girls were kept by the appellant there on that night at Shahdara. Next day the younger daughter Bappo was permitted to go to her residence. After arriving at her residence Bappo, she narrated the entire incident to her parents. Consequently, a report was lodged by Babu Khan on 16.3.1975.

(3.) The prosecution has examined 16 witnesses to support its case. The prosecutrix (Public Witness -9) Tara has been examined, in which she has categorically stated that she had known the accused for some time and she had been talking to him. The accused had taken both the sisters to Shahdara. Bappo was permitted to return but he took the prosecutrix to Meerut, where a house was taken on rent and the accused and the prosecutrix stayed there for about 8 days. She categorically mentioned that the accused had not committed any sexual intercourse with her. A specific question was put to her whether the appellant went to meet her near Jama Masjid? In reply to that question, she stated that he used to meet her for 2-3 months prior to the incident.