GUDDU @ JITENDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was charged under Sections 376, 302 read with Section 34 IPC in Session Trial No. 353 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 652 of 2009, PS- Rajabpur, District- Jyotiba Phule Nagar for having committed rape and murder of the deceased Ms. Pinki aged about 20 years, daughter of the informant Harpal Singh who has been examined as PW-1. The trial court has proceeded to assess the evidence whereafter it has acquitted the appellant of the charge of rape, but has convicted the appellant for having committed the murder of the deceased and has punished him for the offence under Section 302 IPC awarding him life imprisonment with Rs. 20,000/- as fine, and in default of payment thereof, to further undergo one year of imprisonment.

(2.) The appellant was charged for the said offences along with co-accused Rajeev S/o Mahesh Prajapati who was declared a juvenile, and accordingly, his case was transferred to the appropriate Court. Thus, it was the appellant alone who was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and convicted and sentenced under the impugned judgment dated 20.07.2013.

(3.) The FIR was lodged on 07th June, 2009 at about 05:00 pm by PW-1 informant Harpal narrating that the co-accused Rajeev and the appellant Guddu @ Jitendra used to come to his house and they were known to the family. At about 10:30 am on the same day both the accused came to his house and accompanied his daughter Ms. Pinki aged about 20 years telling him that they were taking her to Amroha (Jyotiba Phule Nagar) for an interview. The informant further narrates that when his daughter did not return till 03:00 pm in the afternoon, then his son and other family members set out to search his daughter at the residence of co-accused Rajeev but neither his daughter nor any of the accused were available. Then they went to the residence of the appellant at village Sakarpur Ki Marahaiya where also they did not find either the deceased or the accused, and consequently, they took their journey back to their village. When they reached a roadside restaurant, namely Sadbhavna Hotel, they saw that there was a crowd of some people standing at the tubewell behind the said hotel. There were some people coming and going from there towards the main road. The informant made an enquiry from the passers by who informed him that a dead body of a girl is lying in the tubewell of the accused appellant. The informant and the others then went to the site and saw his daughter lying dead with a rope tied around her neck.