KHEMCHAND ALIAS TAINI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant/accused has directed this appeal under Section 374 of Cr.PC being aggrieved by the judgment dated 25-2-2004 passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in S.T. No. 195/03, convicting him under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC, with the sentence for five years' RI with fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of depositing the fine further three months' RI in the earlier section, while seven years' RI with fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of depositing such fine further six months' RI in the later section, with a direction to run such sentence concurrently.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that on 6-1-2003 one Pushpabai, the mother of Baby, the prosecutrix, lodged a missing person report with Police Inderganj, Gwalior stating that her aforesaid daughter has been missed from her home and in spite making efforts she could not trace her out. In the course of enquiry of such report a Crime No. 40/03 was registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC. In the course of enquiry the identity card and mark-sheet of the prosecutrix were seized. The missing daughter of said complainant namely Baby was also recovered by preparing Panchnama (Exh. P-4). She was medically examined. After recording the interrogatory statement of witnesses, making the arrest of the appellant, on conclusion of the investigation, prima facie on the basis of collected evidence it was found that the appellant has committed the abovementioned offences with the prosecutrix Baby, on which he was charge-sheeted before the concerning Court of the Judicial Magistrate having the territorial jurisdiction over the matter.

(3.) After committing the case to the Sessions Court, on framing the charges of the aforesaid offence against the appellant, he abjured the guilt, on which the trial was held in which after recording the evidence of prosecution as well as defence witnesses, on appreciation of the same holding the age of prosecutrix Baby more than 18 years, the appellant was acquitted from the charge under Section 363 of IPC while he was convicted for the offences enumerated under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC with the punishment as stated above. Being dissatisfied with this conviction and sentence the appellant has come forward to this Court.