ASHOK Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal challenging the impugned judgment dated 6.12.2007 passed in S.T.No.56/ 2006 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Badwah, district-West Nimar, whereby convicted the appellant under Sections, 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the "IPC"), sentenced to RI for five year, seven year and ten year, respectively, with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in each count. In default of payment of fine, appellant shall suffer additional RI for three months in each count. All fee substantive jail sentences of the appellant have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, on 12.3.2006 complainant Ganesh (PW-3), father-of the prosecutrix (PW-1), lodged a report (EX.P4) in police station Badwah that he was working in his field in the morning from 10:00 a.m., and at 12:00 noon his son Sandeep (PW-2) reached to him and disclosed that before half an hour he and his sister/ prosecutrix had gone for answering the call of nature near the place known as Kotwar road. He further disclosed that prosecutrix was taken in the forest by the appellant against her consent and will for the purposes of marriage. Prosecutrix raised cry because of which he was afraid and went to his house; where he disclosed this fact to his mother and thereafter to him. Ganesh went to his house and after inquiry, went in search of the prosecutrix along with villagers Ram Singh, Arjun Singh and Totaram and others. When he failed to search the prosecutrix; he lodged the report, on the basis of which Crime No.88/ 2006 was registered, by the police for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 of "the IPC". On the next day prosecutrix was found in the forest, when father of the prosecutrix went along with the police. Prosecutrix was interrogated and sent for medical examination, and examined by PW-9 Dr. Sandhya Swami. PW-7 Dr. G.S. Mujalda after x-ray examination, gave ossification test report Ex.P/9. Appellant was arrested and sent for medical examination. The investigating officer recorded the statements of the witnesses, who were acquainted with the facts of the case and on completion of investigation, filed the charge sheet against the appellant for the offence under Section 363, 366 and 376 of "the IPC".

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the State has supported the impugned judgment and finding arrived at by the learned trial Court.