SK. KAMALUDDIN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein this appeal assails the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.7.1991 passed against him by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. Jajpur in S.T. 0.338/74 of 1990. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jajpur vide the impugned judgment and order held the appellant guilty of the charge under Sec. 493 of Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two year s and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000.00 (rupees four thousand) in default to undergo further R.I. for three months.

(2.) Prosecution placed the case before the trial court that the house of the accused-appellant as well as the victim was adjacent to each other. The accused-appellant was visiting terms with the house of the victim. The accused-appellant brought the victim on 20.2.1989 to PIR BABA and married her by exchange of garlands and gave her an impression of lawful marriage. Thereafter, they lived as husband and wife and the accused-appellant had sexual intercourse with the victim. But, while the victim was carrying a child in her womb, the accused-appellant caused miscarriage to the pregnancy of the victim by taking her to the doctor. Few days thereafter, she was neglected, assaulted and ultimately, on 16.9.1989 driven out from the house of the accused-appellant. Thereafter, the victim made a complaint before the learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur and the said complaint being a case to be triable by the court of Sessions, the same was accordingly committed to the court of Sessions.

(3.) Taking into consideration the aforesaid case which was supported by the materials on record, the trial court framed the charges against the appellant for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 493/313 of IPC. As the appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge, he faced his trial and the prosecution, as such, examined as many as four witnesses and also exhibited certain documents in order to establish the charge against the appellant. The appellant, who had taken the plea of false implication did not examined any witness to substantiate his plea, but exhibited certain documents. On conclusion of, trial, placing reliance on the evidence available on record, the trial court returned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant as stated earlier while acquitting him of the charge under Sec. 313 of IPC.