SHAKEEL ALIAS PAPPOO Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 17/10/1980, passed by Sri Jaswant Singh, the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor in S.T. No. 122 of 1980, State v. Shakeel alias Pappu and Smt. Asghari whereby he convicted the accused appellant Shakeel of the offence under Section 366, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and convicted Smt. Asghari of the offence under Section 368, I.P.C. but instead of sending her to jail released her on probation for a period of one year.

(2.) The prosecution story was that Km. Jannati prosecutrix d/o Gulam Nabi informant of this case was aged 14 years on the date of the occurrence, that on 21-3-79, Gulam Nabi was away from the house and Alijan and Babu real brothers of the prosecutrix were employed in a crusher at Nagina and her mother was also not present at the house and had gone to another house, that at about 11.00 a.m. prosecutrix was going to see her tarseem field, that Shakeel accused appellant No. 1 and Islamuddin co-accused met her in the way and enticed her to go with them, that the accused appellant Shakeel offered to marry her and to keep her well and provide her with clothes and ornaments and by this inducement they took her to rasta for Mirthapur where Hameed, P.W. 3 and Ashfaq, P.W. 2, who belonged to her village met them and when they asked Shakeel accused appellant and his companion as to where they were taking her the accused appellant shaked and his companion Islamuddin told them that they are taking her to Barkha where her Khala lived, that however they did not take her to Barkha but took her to a sugarcane field and kept her in sugarcane field in the night and in the morning Shakeel accused appellant No. 1 took her to his own house where his mother accused appellant No. 2 was present, that at that time the father of accused appellant No. 1 was not present at the house, that Smt. Asgari, accused appellant No. 2 suggested her to marry with Shakeel accused appellant No. 1. It is also the prosecution story that Shakeel accused appellant No. 1 used to threaten her with Taiwal all along. The prosecution story further is that on the date of occurrence, when Gulam Nabi informant came back to his house, his wife told her that the prosecutrix had gone for a walk in the village but had not come back from the previous day, that thereupon he and his sons started making search for the prosecutrix that the next day in the morning after they came across Ashfaq, P.W. 2 and Hameed, P.W. 3 who told him that they had seen the accused appellant No. 1 Shakeel and co-accused Islamuddin taking the prosecutrix with them and that when they had asked them as to where they were taking her, they told them that they were taking her to the house of her Khala, that thereupon the informant went to the Police Station and lodged an F.I.R. about the occurrence at Police Station Sheohara on 22-3-79 at 12.15 p.m. Thereupon a case was registered against the accused appellant Shakeel and Islamuddin under Sections 363/366, I.P.C. Thereafter the prosecutrix was recovered from the house of Shakeel, accused appellant No. 1 where Smt. Ashgari, appellant No. 2 too was present. She was taken to the Police Station on 24-3-79 where the memo about her being recovered and taken to the Police Station was prepared by the police. In due course the Investigating Officer arrested both the accused appellants and submitted a charge-sheet. It is not clear as to what happened to the co-accused appellant Islamuddin nominated in the F.I.R.

(3.) The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. N. Sharma on 24-3-79 at 4.30 p.m. at the Women's Hospital, Bijnor who found the following on general examination :