AKSHAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 27.11.2013 passed by Sessions Judge, Sonbhadra in Sessions Trial No. 131 of 2008 (State v. Akshay Kumar and others) under Section 363, 366 and 376 IPC whereby the accused appellant Akshay Kumar has been convicted and sentenced u/s. 363 IPC to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - with default clause, u/s. 366 IPC to undergo seven years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - with default clause and u/s. 376 IPC to undergo seven years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - with default clause. All the sentences of the accused appellant were directed to run concurrently. The other co -accused Chandrama Ram and Smt. Urmila Devi were acquitted of the charges framed against them under Section 363 and 366 IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that the first informant Shivchan lodged a written report in P.S. Obra, District Sonbhadra on 6.2.2008 at 7.30 p.m. alleging therein that in the night of 5/6.2.2008 at 12.30 a.m. his daughter (hereinafter referred to as the prosecutrix) aged about 15 years was enticed away by accused appellant Akshay Kumar. She was frantically searched out but she was not found.

(3.) THE investigation of this case was entrusted to S.I. Sri Sitaram Yadav (PW -5), who inspected the spot and prepared site plan thereof which is Ext. Ka.3. On 2.4.2008 the Investigating Officer arrested the accused Akshay Kumar, Chandrama Ram and Smt. Urmila Devi and recovered the prosecutrix from their company. The prosecutrix was handed over to her parents and the accused persons were taken to police station. On 3.4.2008 the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.c. was got recorded before the Judicial Magistrate. That statement is Ext. Ka.2.