DULARE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M. C. Jain, J. Appellants are Dularey and Ram Autar, who have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 22-12- 1979 passed by Sri C. L. Anand. the then Hnd Additional Ses sions Judge, Mainpuri in Sessions Trial No. 406 of 1977 which had been decided with connected Sessions Trial No. Ill of 1978 The appellant in connected Sessions Trial No. Ill of 1978 was Munna who was ac quitted. The present appellants have been convicted under Sections 364, I. P. C. and 395, 1. RC. The punishment of life imprisonment has been awarded for the offence punishable under Section 364, I. P. C. and five years rigorous imprisonment has been awarded under Section 395, I. P. C. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE basis of the prosecution case was written First Information Report lodged by P. W-1 Ram Shree at Police Sta tion Ounchha, District Mainpuri on 14-6-1976 at 5. 00 p. m. THE occurrence took place in between the preceding night at about 12 or 1 'o clock in village Nilkanthpur. It was alleged that she and her children were sleeping in her house where a lantern was glowing. Her husband Baldeo was sleeping'outside on Chabulra. THE miscreants appeared at about 12 or 1 O'clock 5 or 6 of them stated belabouring her husband with butts of the guns. 5 or 6 others entered inside the house and started belabouring her to extract infor mation about valuable articles. Some of them were wearing uniforms while others were wearing ordinary cloths. After ran sacking the house, the miscreants looted her jewellery and clothees. the details of which were mentioned in the F. I. R. THEy also fastened her husband to a cot an ab ducted him. THE present two appellants were allegedly identified amongst the miscreants. A case was registered. on the basis of such F. I. R. and the investigation was started. She was subjected to medical examination and as per injury report Ex. Ka-1 prepared on 15-6-1976 at 11. 45, four contusions and two lacerated wounds had been found on her person. After con clusion of investigation, a charge- sheet was laid, inter-alia, against the present ap pellants. THEy pleaded false implication.

(3.) THE first point to be taken note of is that the F. I. R. inordinately delayed. THE incident took place in between night of 13/14-6-1976, but the Fl. R was lodged as late as on 14-6-1976 at 5. 00 p. m. THE dis tance of Police Station was only five miles. THE explanation for the late lodging of the F. I. R tendered by P. W-1 Smt. Ram Shrcc that her son was noi at the house and the report could be lodged only when he returned, is not at all convincing. THE facts as per the prosecution story were quite startling inasmuch as the husband of the complainant had been abducted by the miscreants after having been fastened at the cot. Besides, the dacoity had been committed in her house. She herself says that certain villagers, name ly, Ram Singh and Dcsh Raj had arrived at the spot of the incident with torches. In these circumstances, the Fl. R could and should have been lodged much earlier than at 5. 00 p. m. on 14-6-1976 so that the police could swing in action to recover the abducted husband of the complainant. THE late lodging of the F. I. R. is bound to generate an impression that deliberation and concoction had been made to nominate the appellants as participants of the crime against whom the complainant has spoken of enmity also and who belonged to the same village.