PITHI CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against an order dated 16.10.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal whereby the respondent -Renuka Chaudhary was held guilty for an offence under Section 452 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') while granting benefit of doubt for commission of offence under Section 364 read with Section 511 IPC. Subsequently, learned trial Court released the convict on probation for a good behavior for a period of one year on furnishing of probation bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/ -.

(2.) THE said order was passed by learned trial Court on the basis of a complaint filed by the appellant against the respondent on the allegation that on 08.02.2010 at about 4.30 PM when she was working in kitchen along with her mother -in -law, they heard cries of Aryaki, daughter of complainant, aged 5 years. When they came out of the kitchen they saw that the accused had trespassed into their house with intent to kidnap Aryaki forcibly in order to murder her. They tried to snatch the girl from accused upon which she pushed the complainant. The respondent asked that statements be got made from complainant's husband Honey Chaudhary and her brother Pinku regarding the Will of Nabheet Kalyan in their favour in the Court so that she may become owner of the property of Nabheet. It is further asserted that complainant with great efforts got released Aryaki from the clutches of accused -Renuka. In evidence, the complainant relied upon her statement when she appeared as PW4 and also examined PW5 Gian Chand and PW6 Hukam Singh, the employees working in Chaudhary Oil Company, a petrol pump run by her husband and PW8 Bishan Chaudhary - her mother in law.

(3.) LEARNED trial Court has found that the accused has trespassed into the house of the complainant but granted benefit of doubt in respect of offence of attempt to kidnapping. Learned trial Court recorded the following findings: -