MAHESH LODH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 12.1.2011 of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Raebareli passed in Sessions Trial No. 303 of 2007 (State Vs. Mahesh Lodh) arising out of Case Crime No. 458 of 2004, P.S. Jagatpur, District Raebareli, whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced with three years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.1000/- as fine and in default one month additional simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 363 IPC, four years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.1000/- as fine and in default one month additional simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 366 IPC and seven years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.1500/- as fine and in default one and half months additional simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 376 IPC and it is directed that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The facts giving rise to appeal in brief are that on 27.7.2004, the complainant handed over a written report against the appellant at P.S. Jagatpur, District Raebareli, which was registered as Case No. 458 of 2004 under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC. The allegations made in the written report were that minor daughter of the complainant-Durga Prasad, aged 13 years and who shall hereinafter be called victim, had gone to field in the morning of 20.7.2014 at 8.00 a.m. for planting paddy and when she did not come back home in the evening, the complainant started making search of her but he could not be able to trace out her. During the course of search, the complainant came to know that his daughter was enticed away by the appellant whereupon, he handed over a written report at P.S. Jatatpur, District Raebareli upon which, an first information report under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC was registered against the appellant. The victim was recovered from the company of appellant on 28.7.2004 from Padriya tri-junction and she was medically examined same day. The case was investigated upon by P.W.-6, S.I. Jwala Prasad Chaudhary, who after collecting evidences submitted charge sheet against the appellant under the aforesaid sections in the court of concerned magistrate. The case of appellant being triable by the court of Sessions, the concerned magistrate committed his case to the Sessions Court where from, it was transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Rae Bareli, who held the trial.

(3.) The appellant was charged under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC by the learned trial court which the appellant denied and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the prosecution examined as many as six witnesses, namely, P.W.1- Durga Prasad, P.W.2- the victim, P.W.3-Dr. Nirmala Kumari, P.W.4- Dr. Syd. Altaf, Radiologist, P.W.5-Constable Sati Prasad and P.W.6-Jwala Prasad to prove the charges.