FAQIR CHAND @ GHUKA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAQIR Chand appellant alongwith five other accused, namely, Bachan Lal, Smt. Parkasho, Bishan Dass, Tara Chand and Smt. Romail Devi were broguth to trial for the offences under Sections 366, 363, 368, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide his order dated October 14, 1985 convicted Faqir Chand under Section 366, Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to four years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. The other accused were, however, acquitted of the charges. Faqir Chand has challenged his conviction and sentence in this appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution story in brief is that the house of Uma Devi prosecutrix is situated opposite the house of Smt. Parkasho and her son Bishan Dass accused. They were on visiting terms as neighbourers. The house of Faqir Chand accused is also situated in the neighbourhood and he was on visiting terms with Smt. Parkasho and Bishan Dass accused, who introduced Uma Devi to Faqir Chand, their co-accused. Smt. Parkasho accused gave allurement to Uam Devi that she would have a comforatable life in case she went and lived with Faqir Chand accused. It is alleged that on 11.4.1982, Smt. Parkasho accused went and took Uma Devi prosecutrix alongwith her on the pretext that she wanted to go out and ease herself. The parents and the other family members of Umu Devi were busy watching television programme at that time. After Uma Devi came out of her house with Smt. Parkasho accused, the former at the instance of the latter accompanied Bishan Dass accused up to Foot ball Chowk, Jalandhar City, where Faqir Chand met them. Smt. Parkasho accused also came there with the bedding. Thereafter, Faqir Chand accused took Uma Devi to the General Bus Stand, Jalandhar from where she was taken to Jammu by night bus service. There she was kept for there days in a hotel. From there Uma Devi was taken by Faqir Chand to Delhi and then to Faridabad where she was kept by the said accused for about one year. During this period, Faqir Chand committed rape on her on numerous occassions. She became pregnant and delivered a female child. She was brought to Jalandhar from where she ultimately recovered by the police. Uma Devi was got medically examined and x-rayed for determing her age. Faqir Chand accused was arrested on 4.9.1985 and a supplementary challan was presented against him. He was committed to the Court of Sessions to stand his trial alongwith the other accused.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant in view of the evidence on record did not assail the conviction of his client but strenously urged out for reduction in the sentence. He pleaded that the prosecutrix was about 18 years of age at the time of her alleged abduction. According to him, in fact the prosecutrix had not been enticed or taken away by the appellant but she herself eloped with him. There appears to be substance in his contention. It emerges from the record that the prosecutrix remained with the appellant, for, about one year and during this interval, she became pregnant and delivered a female child. It is not disputed that she has been living with the appellant as his wife since 1982 when she left with the appellant. In the circumstances, I am, clearly of the view that the sentence imposed on the appellant is too excessive, keeping in view the fact that the prosecutrix had willingly gone with the appellant and was also a consenting party to the commission of the sexual intercourse by him the sentence of imprisonment already undergone by him would fully meet the ends of Justice.