ASPAK Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused Aspak stands convicted and sentenced by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Rupnagar vide judgment and order dated 28.8.2004, under sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs 300/- and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days under section 363 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs 500/- and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month under section 366 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs 1000/- and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under section 376 IPC but all the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Feeling aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, convict Aspak has filed the instant criminal appeal.

(2.) Prosecution case is that the complainant Abdul Raseed and accused were residing in the same village. Complainant's daughter was working in his vegetable field about three months prior to the lodging of the FIR. The complainant found his daughter missing from there. She was also not found in the complainant's hut. Despite search, she could not be traced. On 5.6.2002 (date of lodging of FIR), complainant's daughter came back to his house and told that on the day of occurrence (about three months ago) while she was working in the vegetable field, the accused came there and falsely told that the complainant's son Zahir had suffered injury. Believing the accused, the complainant's daughter was taken by the accused. She was also threatened by the accused on the way. The accused kept the complainant's daughter (prosecutrix-name not being mentioned) in a rented room at Malerkotla and committed rape on her daily there under threat. On 5.6.2002, in the morning the accused was called by some one and while going away, he forget to lock room from outside. Getting opportunity, the complainant's daughter escaped from there and came back to her house. Age of the prosecutrix was about 12 years. The complainant reported the matter to the police by making statement. Thereupon the FIR was registered and investigated. Prosecutrix was medico legally examined. Her statement was recorded. Accused was arrested. Other investigation proceedings were conducted. On completion of investigation, prosecution presented report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C.) for prosecution of the accused under sections 363, 366, 376, 342, 506 IPC.

(3.) Charge under sections 363, 366, 376, 342 IPC was framed against the accused who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.