MD USMAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the sole appellant, namely, Md. Usman, against the judgment of conviction dated 6th January, 2000 and the order of sentence dated 7th January, 2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 461 of 1996 whereby the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga has found and held the appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 367, 370 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for offences under Sections 366 and 370 of the Indian Penal Code and also an imprisonment for one year under Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were to run concurrently. The appellant as a result of the order of sentence aforesaid has remained in custody for 3 years 8 months and 25 days and was only released on bail when this appeal was filed.

(2.) The informant, Md. Zakir Hussain gave his fardbayan on 20.05.1996 for an occurrence which took place on 11.05.1996. In his fardbayan, he has stated that his wife Bibi Zainab Khatoon had disappeared from the house in the early hours of the morning. He had tried to locate her but could not find her. Eventually, he gave a Sanha on 15.05.1996 regarding her disappearance. On 20.05.1996, one Md. Usman who was also not present in the village appeared. The informant and some of his co-villagers questioned Md. Usman about his absence from the village and learnt from him that he was responsible for kidnapping Bibi Zainab Khatoon. The informant claims that Md. Usman used to visit his house and meet his wife in his absence and he is the person who is responsible for the entire occurrence. It has also been stated in the First Information Report that Md. Usman, the appellant, disclosed that he had taken Bibi Zainab Khatoon to Muzaffarnagar and sold her for Rs. 3300/- to one Suke Singh. He also produced the Tawiz and the ear rings worn by Bibi Zainab Khatoon as the proof of the fact that his wife had been kidnapped. Md. Usman was produced before the Police Station and was taken into custody.

(3.) It has also transpired that after the First Information Report was instituted, the victim lady was recovered from village Goyal, which is in the district of Muzaffarnagar (U.P.) and produced in the Sahpur Police Station from where she was brought to her village home. It appears that she was released by the Police Authorities at Muzaffarnagar and they had also forwarded certain documents regarding her release etc. to the local Police Station. These documents have not been produced by the prosecution, although they would have been very important for the purposes of showing that the lady was recovered from village Goyal. The statement of Bibi Zainab Khatoon was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate who recorded the statement of the victim lady under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was examined as PW 7.