SUKH DAYAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 7-1-2006/17-1-2006, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 2005.

(2.) The appellant hereinafter to be referred to as 'the accused', was convicted by the learned trial Court, for offence punishable under Sections 342, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/- for the commission of offence under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, he was ordered to further undergo imprisonment for two months. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- for the commission of offence under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to suffer imprisonment for six months. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- for commission of an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, the accused was ordered to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one year. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) Case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that on 21-6-2003, PW-14, Smt. Lal Dei at 2.30 a.m., got her statement under Section 154, Cr. P. C. Ex. PW9/A recorded to the effect that on 20-6-2003, she along with her younger brother Vikas and PW-2 prosecutrix had gone to Udaipur to purchase soem clothes for her younger brother Vikas. At about 8.00 p.m., all of them were returning to their homes at village Salpat and when proceeding near a place called Mini Manali, a taxi came from behind which was being driven by the accused. The accused stopped the vehicle and asked them to sit in the vehicle on the pretext that he would leave them near Salpat Jhula. All of them, boarded the vehicle. When the accused stopped the vehicle, all of them boarded down from the vehicle. However, the accused forcibly dragged the prosecutrix and made her to sit in the vehicle and drove the said vehicle towards Udaipur. The prosecutrix started crying. It was dark, hence she along with her brother Vikas could not go towards Udaipur. They proceeded to their village and disclosed this incident to PW-1, Bimla Devi, elder sister of the prosecutrix by visiting her house. PW-1, Bimla Devi, accompanied by her brother Karam Lai and PW-14, Lal Dei, went in search of Sumitra to Udaipur. They searched out the prosecutrix at Udaipur. They visited the house of accused. She was not found there. They found one taxi parked near the house of Sukh Diyal, in which the prosecutrix was not found. The door of the house was bolted from inside. PW-14. Smt. Lal Dei knocked the door of the house of the accused and asked him about the whereabouts of the prosecutrix. The accused denied the presence of prosecutrix. However, when PW-14, Lal Dei looked inside the room, the prosecutrix was present inside the room of the accused. She was weeping. She was found confined. On the basis of Ex. PW-9/A, FIR Ex. PW9/B was registered. The prosecutrix was medically examined. The accused was also medically examined. Taxi was impounded. The spot of occurrence was also got identified from the accused. Thereafter, the investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.