MD. MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 21/12/2018 By judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 30/1/2009 and 3/2/2009 respectively passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.8, Purnea, in Sessions Case No.23 of 2003/Tr. No.106 of 2008 arising out of Kasba P.S. Case No. 181 of 2002, the sole Appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sec. (s) 366-A/511, 455, 452 and 341 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years for the offence under Sec. (s) 366-A/511 Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Sec. (s) 455 Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for four years for the offence under Sec. (s) 452 Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days for the offence under Sec. (s) 341 Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that Appellant was always threatening the Informant to solemnize marriage of his daughter with him. He had written several letters to his daughter. His daughter was taking tuition from one teacher, who was also threatened not to teach the Informant's daughter. His father and mother were also adamant for altercation with the Informant. On 3/10/2002, at about 11.30 PM, the Informant along with his family members were sleeping in the house. Suddenly, daughter of the Informant started crying Bachao-Bachao. Thereafter, inmates of house got awake and saw Appellant and Mahboob had caught hold Ismat Jahan. They were taking her outside the house. Muzaffar had closed her mouth. The Informant raised alarm upon which neighbours came and rescued the daughter of the Informant. In the meantime, Margub Alam, Quasim and Tahir came and rescued the accused persons on the point of .303.

(3.) The prosecution has examined ten witnesses in the case. Md. Ziyaur Rahman (PW 10) is the informant of this case. Ismat Jahan (PW 6) is daughter of the Informant (victim). These two witnesses are the most important witnesses in the case. They are only eye witnesses to the occurrence according to First Information Report.