BRIJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment I dispose of two Criminal Appeals Nos. 409-SB of 1996 titled Brijesh Kumar v, State of Haryana and 336-SB of 1996 titled Saroj v. State of Haryana as both these appeals have arisen from the judgment dated 24th April. 1996 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge. Jagadhri who convicted appellant Smt. Saroj under Section 363 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code. Smt. Saroj was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- under Section 363 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine she was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code, she was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default of payment of fine she was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. Brijesh appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months, under Section 363 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine years and to pay a fine or Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code this appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Shri Chhotu Ram complainant gave the Statement on 26th June 1994 before the Investigating Officer that he was resident of village Bhagwangarh and was a labourer. His eldest brother Mam Chand was married with Smt. Karjo. daughter of Surta Ram and from that wedlock one son namely Baldev and one daughter namely Meena were born. About 13 years ago Mam Chand brother of the complainant, died, the complainant was unmarried at that time. After about three years of the death of Mam Chand, Chhotu Ram complainant performed Karewa marriage with Smt. Karjo and four children were born out of this wedlock. In this way the complainant alleged himself to be father of Baldev and Smt. Meena also. According to the complainant, Meena went to school and studied up to 5th standard and due to poverty she could not be educated further. On 24th June, 1994 Smt. Meena had gone to the fields of Risala Jat for planting paddy and she came back at about 3 p.m. and after taking her meals and also after taking her bath, she went away saying that she was going to enquire about her stepfather (complainant) who was ill but she did not come to, the complainant. She was searched here and there but to no effect. Later on the complainant Chhotu Ram expressed his suspicion on Brijesh, who was employed in village Bhagwallgarh. Tehsil Jagadhri by Sheo Ram. On this report present case was registered and investigated. During .the course of investigation it transpired that Smt. Saroj co-accused, had brought Smt. Meena prosecutrix to Jhota Chowk. Jagadhri from village Bhagwangarh in a tonga, and she had handed over the custody of the prosecutrix to Brijesh accused-appellant, who was waiting there. On 28th June 1994, the prosecutrix was recovered from the company of accused Brijesh near Bus Stond, Saharanpur. The accused was arrested. Both the accused and the prosecutrix were medico-legally examined and on completion of the investigation, challan was presented in the Court.

(3.) Both the appellants were committed to the Court of Session in order to face the trial and on 16th January. 1995 various charges under Sections 363, 366-A. 376, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, were framed against the appellants. The charges were read over and explained to the appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.