PANIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the accused appellants against the judgment and order dated 31-10-1987 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bali in Sessions Case No. 63/85 (1 of 1983) by which he acquitted the accused appellants Pania for the offence under Sections 366, 323, 323/34 and 342, IPC, Jeevla for the offence under Sections 366, 323, 323/34 and 342, IPC and Kharta for the offence under Sections 366, 323, 323/34, 342 and 376, IPC and also acquitted another accused Mst. Jamni for the offence under Section 368 read with 366, IPC, but convicted the accused appellants for the offence under Section 458, IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo three years RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 9 months RI.

(2.) It arises in the following circumstances:- On 31-5-1982, PW7 Mst. Geeta lodged a written report Ex.P/7 with the Police Station Sadri, District Pali stating inter-alia that on 31-5-1982 at about 1.00 a.m. in the morning, her daughter Jatna (PW6) (hereinafter referred to as the prosecutrix) aged about 16 years had been kidnapped by some persons. It was further stated in the report that when she was sleeping in front of her house, at that time, four persons suddenly entered her house after breaking the door and they also started beating her as well as her daughter prosecutrix PW6 Janta and after pulling prosecutrix PW6 Jatna, they took her outside the house and after putting her in the motor, which was standing outside her house, they took her and at that time, she was weeping severely. It was further stated in the report by PW7 Mst. Geeta that her husband had gone to Sadri and after coming to Sadri, she lodged that report. On this report, police registered the case and chalked out regular FIR Ex.P/8 and started investigation. During investigation, through fard Ex./P3, the prosecutrix PW6 Jatna was got recovered from the possession of the accused appellant Kharta Ram. Thereafter, the prosecutrix PW6 Jatna was got medically examined by PW16 Dr. Champalal and her medical examination report is Ex.P/18. After usual investigation, police submitted challan against the accused appellants and one more accused Mst. Jamni in the Court of Magistrate, from where the case was committed to the Court of Session. On 12-8-1986, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bali framed charges against the accused appellants and one more accused Mst. Jamni in the following manner :- Name of acuused persons Charges

(3.) In this appeal, the main submission of the learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellants is that since the accused-appellants have been acquitted of all the substantive charges framed against them, therefore, the findings of conviction for the offence under Section 458, IPC are palpably erroneous one on the ground that when the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has come to the conclusion that no offence of kidnapping or causing injuries to the prosecutrix PW6 Jatna and her mother PW7 Geeta was found proved against the accused-appellants, therefore, the offence that accused, appellants entered the house of PW7 Geeta with an intention to kidnap her daugher prosecutrix PW6 Jatna, cannot be said to be proved against them. Hence, it was prayed that this appeal be allowed and the impugned judgment and order be set aside and the accused-appellants be acquitted of the charges for the offence under Section 458, IPC.