STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. MAHENDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on admission. This is an application for grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Code" for short). By the impugned judgment dated 30/4/13 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Sessions Trial No. 374/10, respondent nos. 1 and 3 have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "the Code") and respondent no. 2 of the offence under Section 376 of the IPC. However, respondent no. 2 has been convicted under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC and sentenced accordingly.

(2.) As per the prosecution story, on 28/2/10 at about 1 a.m., respondent no. 1 Mahendra, took the prosecutrix to a nearby Mandir on the pretense that she was being called by her brother Mukesh. As she reached the Mandir, she found that respondent nos. 2 and 3 viz. Halle and Ramkumar were already present there. All the respondents successfully induced the prosecutrix that respondent no. 2 was in love with her and wanted to marry her and respondent no. 2 along with other respondents, on a promise to marry, took the prosecutrix to Khurai and then to Delhi, from where respondent nos. 1 and 3 returned. After staying in Delhi for a day, he again took her to Khurai and then to Indore, where he lived with her for two months in a rented room. During this period, making her believe that she was lawfully married to him, he persistently subjected her to sexual intercourse and impregnated her. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) Learned Government Advocate, while making reference to the evidence on record, submitted that the trial Court has erred in appreciating the evidence and the judgment of acquittal deserves to be interfered with.