RAIMAL RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant for the offence under Sec. 363, 366(A), 376(D) IPC and Sec. 3/4, 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that initially a Missing Person Report (Ex.P/6) was lodged at the instance of Peera Ram son of Ratna Ram Ji (PW-6) on 26/11/2017 wherein, it was stated that his minor daughter aged about 17 1/2 years is missing since 5 AM. It is further submitted that in the said Missing Person Report, no suspicion was cast on anyone. However, the victim Mst 'S' being the minor daughter of PW-6 was recovered on 5/12/2017 from Ahmedabad. She filed a written complaint, in which, for the first time, the appellant-applicant was named as the accused. Learned counsel has submitted that in her written complaint (Ex.P/7), the victim Mst. 'S' stated that she left her house on her own and, thereafter, the appellant-applicant met her and both of them went to Sanchore and thereafter Ahmedabad in a pick-up vehicle. In her police statement recorded on 5/12/2017 itself, the victim has reiterated the same allegations stating that she left her house on her own, however, in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 CrPC (Ex.P/10), she changed the version and stated that appellant-applicant came in a Bolero vehicle and had forcibly abducted her while tying her hands and legs. It is also argued that the victim has falsely stated in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 CrPC that appellant-applicant had forcibly abducted because in her court statement, again she has stated that she left her house on her own.