MOOL CHAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above Criminal Appeals have been preferred by the appellants assailing the judgment and order of the court below dated 3.4.1982 rendered by X Addl Sessions Judge Etah in trial No 627 of 1978 whereby the appellant Mool Chand has been convicted for offences under section 363, 366A, 354 and 368 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years, 4 years, six months and four years respectively. Appellant Reshma and Vivekanand have been convicted under section 366A and 368 IPC and each of them have been sentenced to undergo RI for 4 years and again for 4 years respectively. The prosecution case is that Km Anar Devi, a minor girl native of village Unchagaon within the circle of PS Sahawar district Etah who had been induced by appellant Mool Chand to accompany him on a false pretext of showing her Exhibition at Aligarh about 3 years back (from the date of recovery of the girl), was recovered from the possession of Vivekanand and Smt Reshma appellants from a house situated in Mohalla Ambakhar District Mathura and at the time of recovery appellants Reshma and Vivekanand were also taken into custody and after recovery memo was prepared, a first information report was dictated by SI Hari Nandan Singh Incharge of police outpost Bangali Ghat on 29.12.76 to H.C Swarna Singh which was registered at PS Kotwali. After the arrest, the girl was escorted to PS Sahawar District Etah from PS Kotwali Distt Etah by Constable Nek Singh on 31.12.1976 and thereafter the girl was entrusted to the care of her mother Ganga Devi. At the time of recovery, the girl was said to be aged 12 years. The girl was medically examined on 1.1.1977 at 3 pm at District Hospital Etah. At the time of her examination, she was opined to be less than 16 years.

(2.) THE investigation of the case was conducted by SI Hori Lal Verma who after completing investigation submitted charge sheet in the court. Accused Smt Reshma and Vivekanand abjured the guilt submitting that the girl was not recovered from their house and rather she was recovered from the market place where the girl had gone to make purchases. They also stated that it was Mool Chand who had brought the girl to their house but they refused to keep her at their house upon which Mool Chand told them that she was his real niece and that on account of financial straits, it was not possible for the family to arrange for her marriage and that since she was a minor girl, she would be married Shakti Singh after she attains puberty. It was further stated that accepting the version of Mool Chand as true, they allowed the girl to stay at their house but she was treated as her daughter and all comforts were given to her and she was not abused at any stage.

(3.) THIS witness was extensively cross examined, and it would suffice to say that nothing adverse impeaching her testimony could be elicited. First of all, I would take up the case against the appellants namely, Smt Reshma and Vivekanand. It is stated that initially the prosecutrix was taken to the house of Shakti Singh where in Smt Reshma and Vivekanand were present. Mool Chand had left the girl after accepting a sum of Rs 2500/- from Smt Reshma on the assumption that she would be married to Shakti Singh son of Smt Reshma. She also deposed that Mool Chand had misrepresented to Smt Reshma and Vivekand that the prosecutrix was his real niece and that on account of poverty, they were unable to arrange for marriage and also that she may be married to Shakti Singh. It is also deposed that thereafter, Mool Chand had brought some Pandit and marriage was performed but at the same time she deposed that no Phere was done in the marriage ceremony. She also stated that thereafter, it was decided by Smt Reshma and Vivekanand that the marriage would be performed all over again after she attained puberty. She also deposed that she was not at any stage abused and that she was given all comforts during her stay there. She also deposed that she stayed at Aligarh for about 10 to 12 days and thereafter she was shifted to Mathura from where she was recovered by the police. She also deposed that Smt Reshma always treated her like her daughter in law and she was called by the name "Kamlesh". She also deposed that she never put on veil before Vivekanand and Reshma and she had a free run in the house and always used to behave like a daughter in the house. She denied the suggestion that she was deposing falsely against Mool Chand.