KHYALI RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is brought from the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Solan in a case under Sections 363 and 366 of the I. P. Code, wherein Khyali Ram (24 years) stands charged for these offences and is convicted to five years rigorous imprisonment under each count.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution was that Khyali Ram accused, was a relation of Beli Ram and Sarla. parents of the prosecutrix Ram Pyari said to be about 18 years on the date of the offence. At village Dhundan, both the parties were residing and it is again an admitted case of the parties that Khyali Ram accused used to come and stay at the house of Beli Ram. Accordingly on 28th June, 1972 when the accused Khyali Ram was sleeping at the house of Beli Ram, in the early hours of that morning he eloped with Ram Pyari and both of them travelled on foot and came near Ghu-marwin. Thereafter they came to villages Aur and Bagher. At Bagher, the accused pawned woollen 'pattu' Ex. P-l, which he had brought from the house of Beli Ram, with Ram Parkash shopkeeper for Rs. 5. Thereafter the accused boarded a bus at Ghumarwin and brought the girl to Ladror and thereafter to his own house at Lagmanoo. The usual search of the girl was made by the parents for a couple of days so that the F. I. R. could be instituted only on 14-7-1972 at 1. 30 P. M. at P. S. Arki. The informant was Beli Ram the father of the girl. The investigation was taken up by Tilak Ram, A. S. I. , and upon information received he recovered Ram Pyari from the house of the accused on 17-7-1972. Thereafter she was medically examined on 21-7-1972 by Dr. Pushpa Rani who opined that the girl's age was about 1 (5 to 17 years. The radiological test was undertaken by Dr. M. L. Ahuja on 22-7-1972 and the said test disclosed that she was about 18 years in age. However, the doctor also opined that she could be even more by six months. On these facts and allegations, a case under Sections 363 and 366, I. P. Code, was instituted against Khyali Ram.

(3.) THE defence of the accused was that in fact he was married to Ram Pyari and both of them lived together at the house of Beli Ram. Ram Pyari was more than 18 years on the date of the alleged offence. She herself went with him and both began residing at the house of the parents of the accused. Since Beli Ram was demanding some money from him, he was falsely implicated and this case was brought against him. About the 'pattu' Ex. P-l, the accused stated that it belonged to him and that he did pawn that pattu to Ram Parkash.