STATE OF H.P. Vs. RAJESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to the judgment dated 14th February, 1996, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, in Sessions Trial No. 04 of 1994, thereby acquitting both the Respondents / accused persons for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) In order to adjudicate the present criminal appeal, it is necessary to give the factual background of the case. The facts, according to the prosecution story, are that on 17.8.1993, Raseel Singh, father of the prosecutrix / victim (name not narrated) reported to the Police Station, Sujanpur, that his daughter aged about 16 - 17 years studying in DAV College at Sujanpur in 10 + 1 used to go to the College daily from her house in village Lahar but on 16.8.1993, the prosecutrix did not come back home. Accordingly, the father enquired from fellow students in the village but nothing was known definitely. Thereafter, the father of the prosecutrix visited the Principal of the College during the night and enquired about his daughter and had come to know that his daughter left for her house after the period was over. Thereafter, the father of the prosecutrix, accompanied by Principal, visited the Lecturer of the College at Sujanpur, who in turn accompanied them to the President of the College Committee, who had disclosed that he heard a rumour that one girl with boy cut was taken in a bus by accused Rajesh, along with two boys, round about 5 PM towards Nadaun. On report of the father of the prosecutrix, the case for offences under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 34 IPC was registered against the accused persons. During investigation, it was found that accused Rajesh took the prosecutrix in the house of his aunt (Mausi) at Nangal from Nadaun on 16.8.1993. On 17.8.1993 Vidhi Chand, father of accused Rajesh, after having come to know about the registration of such case, reached in a taxi driven by one Vijay Kumar and accompanied by his relative Vinod Kumar and accused Kamal Kumar at Nangal. After having some consultations, the prosecutrix / victim was brought at Hamipur in the same taxi for the purpose of solemnization of her marriage with accused Rajesh and the victim was made to stay in the house of accused Kamal Dev. After coming to know that the age of the prosecutrix was less than 18 years and her marriage with accused Rajesh cannot be solemnized, as such, the prosecutrix as well as accused Rajesh were sent to their relatives' house at Nangal in District Bijnaur (Uttar Pradesh). Consequently, on 19.8.1993, the prosecutrix and accused Rajesh were made to board the bus from Hamirpur to Una, Bijnaur, while Vidhi Chand, accused Kamal Dev came back to their houses. The case under Section 368 read with Section 109 IPC was registered against them. In an attempt of search, ultimately on 23.8.1993 the prosecutrix, along with accused Rajesh, was apprehended at Nangal and accused Rajesh was arrested while the prosecutrix, after medical examination, was handed over to her father Raseel Singh.

(3.) The case was committed for sessions trial and on examination, the learned Sessions Judge discharged Vidhi Chand, Vinod Kumar and Ravinder Kumar, however, has charged Rajesh Kumar for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and accused Kamal Kumar alias Kamal Dev for offence under Section 368 IPC.