STATE OF M P Vs. NAUSAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition filed by the State seeks leave of this Court u/s 378(3) Cr.P.C. to prefer an appeal against the judgment dated 07.02.2017 in S.T. No. 1/2011 rendered by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Ashok Nagar whereby respondent has been acquitted of the charges u/s 363, 366 read with Section 120-B and 376 IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the State is heard on the question of admission.

(3.) Bare facts giving rise to the present case are that complainant (PW-2), mother of the prosecutrix, on 27.08.2010 when the incident occurred resided with her children for their education in the house of Rambihari Pandit in Ashok Nagar. Komal Pandit, husband of the said complainant, worked as Muneem in Krishi Upaj Mandi. In the same colony accused Nausad used to reside in a tenanted accommodation. The prosecutrix, who was the elder daughter of complainant after having failed in Class-X examination, appeared for the same examination by correspondence in the year in which incident occurred. The said accused Nausad used to stalk the prosecutrix and used to insist that he would get married to her. On 27.08.2010 when complainant Mithlesh was sitting in front of her house along with prosecutrix, the said prosecutrix walked away without informing her mother. On search at Bus-stand, Mandi and house of a teacher, the prosecutrix was not found. Consequently, father Komal was summoned but yet prosecutrix could not be traced out whereafter the FIR was lodged bearing Crime No. 611/2010, alleging offences punishable u/Ss. 363 / 366 (ka), 368, 342, 120B and 376 IPC against the accused Nausad. The prosecutrix was recovered on 11.12.2010 vide Panchnama (Ex.P-2) and disclosed in her statement that on 27.08.2010 the accused kidnapped the prosecutrix and took her to Bhopal via Sarangpur where they stayed at the relative's house of the accused for a day, thereafter they shifted to tenanted room where the accused and the prosecutrix stayed till 07.09.2010 when the accused took the prosecutrix to a Masjid where they entered into a wedlock. It was also alleged by the prosecutrix that from 29.08.2010 to 07.09.2010 the accused committed rape upon the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination while the accused was arrested and was also medically examined. The document in regard to age of the prosecutrix were recovered. Chemical examination of articles was conducted and after completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed alleging offence punishable u/Ss. 363 / 366 (ka), 368, 342, 120B and 376 IPC.