NIBBU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nibbu-accused-appellant has directed the present appeal against the judgment dated 09.09.2004 and order dated 10.09.2004 passed by Shri B.M.Bajaj, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gurgaon vide which he stood convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for offence under Section 363 of the IPC ; further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for offence under Section 366 of the IPC and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for offence under Section 376 of the IPC. However, all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 10.10.2003 Ramesh complainant presented an application before the police alleging that his daughter (prosecutrix) was kidnapped on 8.9.2003 by Nibbu accused by giving false allurements. Complainant though made efforts to search her but in vain. Therefore, on the basis thereof case was registered against the accused. On 11.10.2003 at Rajiv Chowk Nibbu accused with prosecutrix was found standing by the police party accompanying the complainant and after seeing the police the acccused ran away. He was taken into custody and got medico-legally examined. Various proceedings were conducted at the spot. Site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. Statements of the PWs were recorded. After completion of necessary investigation, challan against the accused was presented.

(3.) On appearance of the accused, copies of documents were supplied to the accused free of costs. Charge under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.