KALI PADO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is the brother-in-law (Jija) of the prosecutrix (PW-6 ). He has been convicted by the trial court for committing the offences under section 363/366/376 of the Indian Penal Code and vide order dated 30th august, 2005, he has been sentenced for the offence under Section 376 of the indian Penal Code, to RI for seven years and to pay a fine of rupees ten thousand and in default thereof, to undergo SI for one month. He has been also sentenced for the offence under Section 363 of the IPC to RI for two years and to a fine of rupees one thousand and in default thereof, to undergo si for one month. Rigorous imprisonment of three years has been awarded to the appellant for the offence under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and a fine of rupees one thousand has been also imposed upon him and in default thereof, appellant has been directed to undergo SI for one month. Aforesaid sentences have been ordered to run concurrently by the trial court.

(2.) IN this appeal, aforesaid conviction and sentence has been assailed by the appellant.

(3.) THE factual matrix of the prosecution case is as under :- On 23. 10. 2003, Smt. Urmila Devi W/o Chalitra Paswan went to PS Okhla industrial Area and got recorded her statement through SI Manoj Kumar vide Ex. PW3/a regarding kidnapping of her daughter Sanju on which SI manoj Kumar made endorsement Ex. PW9/a and handed over the same to the Duty Officer for registration of FIR and SI Manoj Kumar started search for the appellant and prosecutrix but they could not be traced and SI Manoj kumar sent WT message to CBI office, Crime Branch Office and the missing report was advertised in Doordarshan and the fact was also advertised in newspapers but the prosecutrix could not be traced. On 29. 1. 2004, SI Manoj kumar received a secret information about the presence of the prosecutrix and the appellant near Machli Market, Gobind Puri and he immediately went to the place of information alongwith Ct. Chattar Singh and informer and as per the pointing out of the secret informer, and as per the photographs of the prosecutrix, apprehended the prosecutrix and the appellant Kali Pado. SI Manoj Kumar then prepared recovery memo Ex. PW2/c, brought the appellant as well as prosecutrix to the police station and as per the directions of senior officers, appellant and the prosecutrix were handed over to W/si sangmitra alongwith the case for further investigation. Appellant was arrested and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW. 2/a and he was interrogated and thereafter prosecutrix and the accused were sent to AIIMS for their medical examination in the custody of lady Ct Sunita and ct. Chattar Singh and after medical examination of the prosecutrix, lady ct. Sunita handed over one sealed pulanda and one sample seal which SI sangmitra seized vide memoex. PW. 1/a and after medical examination of appellant, Ct. Chattaar Singh handed over four sealed parcels and sample seal which SI Sangmitra seized. Appellant was sent to lock up Kalka Ji and prosecutrix remained in the police station under "the supervision of SI sangmitra. Next day, accused and prosecutrix were produced before the court from where the prosecutrix was sent to Nari Niketan and appellant was sent to judicial custody. Investigating Officer seized certificate from girls Senior Secondary School, Kalka Ji regarding the date of birth of the prosecutrix vide memo Ex. PW. 5/b, recorded the statement of witnesses and case property was sent to CFSL. After completion of investigation, chargesheet for the offence under Section 363/366/376 of Indian Penal Code was filed against the appellant/accused.