STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAJU @ RAJIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-State has laid this leave to appeal under Sec. 378(iii) and (i) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') to assail the judgment dated 13.05.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Chittorgarh (for short 'learned trial Court'), whereby learned trial Court has acquitted the accused-respondent for offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 Penal Code by extending benefit of doubt.

(2.) Succinctly stated, the facts of the case are that on 21.11.2011, P.W.5 Kalu filed a complaint before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begun against accused-respondent and five others that they attacked on him and his daughter on 23.10.2011 when they were in their agricultural field. As per averments, at the time of incident all the accused person were armed with lathies, sword and axe and after arriving on the agricultural field they started beating him. On intervening by his wife, she was also given beatings. Finally the accused persons forceably taken away his minor daughter aged 14 years with them and confined her in a room for compelling her to marry accused-respondent. In the complaint, besides the allegation of abduction, apprehension was also shown by the complainant that his minor daughter might be sexually exploited by the accused-respondent. Learned Magistrate forwarded the complaint to Police Station, Begun under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C and thereupon case No.358/2011 for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 323 and 341 Penal Code was registered. After investigation, Police submitted charge sheet against the accused-respondent for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 Penal Code before the learned Magistrate. Learned Magistrate, thereafter, committed the case to learned trial Court as it was a Sessions Case triable by the Court of Sessions.

(3.) Learned trial Court, after hearing arguments on the charge, framed charges against accused-respondent for the aforesaid offences. For proving accusation against accused-respondent, prosecution examined 16 witnesses and exhibited 21 documents. After recording statement of accused under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C., learned trial Court accepted the documentary evidence on behalf of accused respondent. In defence, no oral evidence was tendered by the accused-respondent. Learned trial Court, thereafter, proceeded for final arguments and by the impugned judgment acquitted the accused by extending benefit of doubt. In order to unearth truth about the complaint, the learned trial Court examined the entire prosecution case threadbare in conjunction with the evidence tendered by prosecution. Learned trial Court framed a point of determination as to whether accused-respondent forceably abducted prosecutrix Ms. 'I' from the custody of her natural guardian father and forced her to establish sexual relation with him and this sort of act and omission amounts to commission of rape.