STATE OF H.P. Vs. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 4.9.1999 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan in Sessions Trial No. 23 -ST/7 of 1998 whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the prosecutrix was working in the milk plant in village Rampur. She was residing with her parents in village Manpur Devra. The accused was also working in the milk plant. On 22.5.1997 the prosecutrix did not return home after performing her duties at the milk plant. Therefore, the father of the prosecutrix, PW -7 Kirat Singh, lodged a report Ext.P -9 with the Police Station -Paonta Sahib about the disappearance of his daughter. After two and half months later the prosecutrix was recovered on 6.8.1997 from the residential house of the accused at village Huranwala. Thereafter, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded. She was got medically examined. On completion of investigation, challan was filed against the accused for having committed the offences aforesaid. He was charged and tried for having committed the aforesaid offences. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused. Hence, the present appeal by the State.

(3.) AS far as the third ground taken by the learned trial Court is concerned, we are not in agreement with the findings of the learned trial Court. When in the course of the same transaction two or more offences take place then the trial can take place at the Court where any one of the offence has taken place.