JENISH @KANO MANSUKHBHAI BARAIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present appeal, filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of conviction dated 20.8.23011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khambhaliya, in Sessions Case No.41 of 2010. The said case was registered against the appellant original accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant is sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and fine of Rs.500/, in default, S.I. for one week for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of the Indian Penal Code. He is further sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and fine of Rs.1000/, in default, S.I. for one month for the offence punishable under Sections 366 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.2000/, in default, S.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, on 25.5.2009, the complainant had gone for labour work of centering and when he went to home at about 630 hrs in the evening, his wife Prabhaben told him that their daughter (the victim) who had gone for labour work in the oilmill of Bhuveshbhai Kadiya at 730 hrs in the morning has not returned yet. On saying such fact, three persons younger brother Ashok, his wife and he went to the groundnut oilmill of Bhuveshbhai. As Bhuveshbhai was present there, he asked him about his daughter (the victim). He told that the victim and Jenish @ Kano Mansukhbhai Bariya have not been seen in the oilmill after the afternoon and he does not know as to where they might have gone. Thereafter, when they were looking for his daughter, he came to know that his daughter (the victim), Jenish @ Kano Mansukhbhai and Kapilbhai Khant of Uma CD Corner were in Monday weekly market. In spite of this, he did not believe this fact. Thereafter, though they had looked for their daughter, but she has not been found till date. Thus, the accused person of this case namely Jenish @ Kano Mansukh Bariya has abducted his daughter (the victim) aged 15 yrs and 11 months from his legal guardianship by alluring her to marry with the intention to have sexual intercourse. As he had abducted her for this purpose and as the accused Kapilbhai Khant of Uma CD Corner has abetted him in the abduction, it is his complaint to initiate legal procedure in this regard. Initially they were not aware regarding the fact as to where his daughter (the victim) may have gone and thereafter as they came to know that Jenish @ Kano Mansukh Bariya has abducted her, they were making inquiry on their own. Therefore, delay has been caused in lodging the complaint. Hence the complaint was lodged.

(3.) ON the basis of above allegations, investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, accused person was arrested and, ultimately, chargesheet came to be filed against him. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed to the Court of Sessions.