LALU KAMUMAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ATHASINGH has been found guilty of offences under Sections 366 and 376, Penal Code. Under Section 366, Penal Code he has been sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 376, Penal Code he has been sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and to fifteen stripes. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) LALU has been found guilty of offences under Sections 366 and 376/144, Penal Code. On each count he has been sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment with the direction that both the sentences are to run concurrently. Against their conviction and sentence, they have come up in appeal. Lalu has filed Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1952 and Athusingh has filed Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1952. Both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and have been argued together. I have, therefore, given only one judgment in them. The original judgment will be placed in the file of Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1952 and a copy thereof will be filed in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1952. The judgment will govern both the appeals.

(3.) THE prosecution story is that Partap P. W. 1, and his wife Sm. Pari P. W. 2 lived on the ground floor of a building in Mohalla Shisha Khan. Another room in the ground floor was vacant. Two rooms in the upper storey were occupied by Kauromal and Sm. Shanti and her husband Boolchand. The prosecution case is that the accused persons used to visit Sm. Shanti and when doing so they used to stand in front of Partap's house. This was objected to by Partap. 2-3 days prior to 25. 1. 1952 Sm. Pari reprimanded the accused persons.