ARVINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment disposes of two Criminal Appeals Nos. 503-SB and 519-SB of 1994, as the both arise out of the same judgment dated 15. 10. 1994 passed by additional Cessions Judge, Patiala, vide which accused Baldeep Singh alias Deepa was convicted under Sections 363, 366 and 376, whereas the remaining two accused, namely Arvinder Kaur alias Rozi and amarjit Kaur were convicted under Section 363/109 and 366/109 of the Indian Penal code and were sentenced as under: baldeep Singh U/s 376 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and pay fine of rs. 1,000, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months; u/s 366 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of rs. 1,000, in default of payment of fine; to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. U/s 363 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of rs. 1,000, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. Arvinder Kaur U/s 366 IPC to undergo and Amarjitkaur rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of Rs. 500, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. U/s 363 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and pay fine of Rs. 500, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months, each.

(2.) BALDEEP Singh alias Deepa, aged about 22/23 years and Arvinder Kaur alias Rozi, aged about 18/19 years are son and daughter of Jagmohan Singh, whereas, Amarjit kaur is the brother's wife of Baldeep singh-accused. Arvinder Kaur alias Rozi and the prosecutrix (name not being disclosed)were the friends. Baldeep Singh-accused was employed on the shop 'diamond Saree and Silk Store', Patiala. Baldeep Singh and the prosecutrix had developed love affairs and he wanted to marry the prosecutrix, to which she was not agreeing. It has been further disclosed by Dalbir singh (PW7-father of the prosecutrix) (hereinafter referred to as the complainant)that on 27. 6. 1988 at about 11. 30 a. m. ,accused-Arvinder Kaur alias Rozi took the prosecutrix from their house with the consent of her mother on the pretext to go to bazar, but she did not turn up. Since the prosecutrix did not turn up to her house up to 9. 00 p. m. , they suspected that accused baldeep Singh had enticed her away with the connivance of Amarjit Kaur and arvinder Kaur alias Rozi. The complainant continued searching her till 12. 40 p. m. on 28. 6. 1988. Ultimately, he got recorded his statement before the Station House Officer, police Station Kotwali, Patiala, on the basis of which formal First Information Report no. 118 under Sections 363, 366 IPC was registered. Sub-Inspector Chaman Lal investigated the case, prepared the site-plan ex. PW11a of the place from where the prosecutrix was kidnapped. After long search, on 2. 7. 1988 at 5. 30 p. m. , accused Baldeep singh along with the prosecutrix came to bus stand, Patiala, who were spotted by jagir Singh (PW10 ). The prosecutrix approached him, but accused Baldeep Singh took to his heals. Ultimately, Jagir Singh brought them out of the main bus stand and produced them before Sub-Inspector chaman Lai (PW11 ). She got recorded her statement under Section 164 of the Code of criminal Procedure and got her medico legally examined.

(3.) ON completion of the investigation, inspector H. P. Singh, SHO, Police Station kotwali, Patiala presented the challan against the accused in the Court.