SOADHEY Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT Appeal has been preferred from Jail assailing the judgment and order dated 2.8.2001 rendered by Addl Sessions Judge /Special Judge (E.C. Act) Rampur in S.T No 141 of 1999 whereby the Appellant has been convicted for offences under Section 302/377/201 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE report of the occurrence was lodged on 27.9.1998 by Hanspal, complainant, who is father of ill -fated six year old son namely, Arjun, an innocent child, who has been a victim of the abuse by his own maternal uncle. The child was initially sodomized and subsequently murdered by his real maternal uncle namely Soadhey to screen himself from his misdeed. The offence is alleged to have been committed in the intervening night of 15/16.9.1998 at about 4 am in the precincts of factory where the Appellant was working and used to sleep. It is alleged by Hanspal father of the deceased that the Appellant was his brother in law (wife's brother) and that Hanspal along with his wife and three children used to reside in the quarters assigned to him by the factory outside factory premises where he worked for his livelihood. It is further alleged that six months prior to the occurrence, the Appellant along with Tulsi and Rampal had shifted to Rampur and got employed in the factory. It is further alleged that the deceased was emotionally attached and felt great affection for his Mama i.e. Appellant. It is also alleged that the Appellant used to sleep in the factory and whenever the deceased awoke from the sleep during night, he often desired to be with the Appellant. The facts of the case shorn of unnecessary details are that on the day of occurrence, the deceased woke up at 4 am and insisted to go to the Appellant. It is alleged that he and his wife tried to dissuade him but he left for the factory. It is also alleged that Chowkidar of the factory also accosted him upon which the deceased went inside the factory stating that he was going to meet his maternal uncle. In the morning, he went looking for his son but neither he nor the Appellant was to be found anywhere. It is also alleged that he relentlessly searched for his son and also for the Appellant. It is also alleged that 3 -4 days prior to lodging of the FIR, the Appellant stumbled across one Ayodhyapal and Kalyan Singh in Rudrupur and at that time, he seemed to be flabbergasted and confessed to them that he had committed a grave mistake and they should intervene in the matter to placate his brother -in -law upon which the aforesaid persons assured him to do the needful and asked him to come over to them. On 27.9.1998, the Appellant came to the house of Ayodhyapal. The complainant it is alleged, also arrived there and on being asked about the whereabouts of the child, he blurted out the truth saying that on the day of occurrence, he had committed sodomy with the deceased and since the deceased had threatened to inform his parents, this frightened him too much and he took Arjun in the toilet nearby and strangulated him to death and the dead body was thrown in the nearby sugarcane field. The complainant along with others took the Appellant to the place as indicated by him where they found skeleton of the deceased along with red bush -shirt, knicker etc and he identified the body on the basis of the cloths which the deceased at that time was wearing. It is further alleged that the Appellant was taken to police station with the help of factory colleagues.

(3.) AS stated supra, aggrieved by the judgment and order in which the Appellant has been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid, present appeal from Jail has been preferred.