AJAI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant Ajai singh against the judgment of learned additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 5, bharatpur, dated June 28, 2004, passed in sessions Case No. 2/2004, whereby he was convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 366 IPC for five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months and for the offence under Section 376 IPC, ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution story is that Bachhu Singh, father of the prosecutrix lodged a written report with the police station, Mathura Gate, Bharatpur, on 9-4-2003, to the effect that his daughter, student of class VIII of Meena Devi Adarsh vidhayalaya, Suraj Mal Nagar, Bharatpur, had gone to school in the morning but did not return even after the school was over at one in the afternoon. On being searched, she could not be traced out. On being asked about the girl, it was told that the Manager of the School Ajai Singh s/o Bhagwan Singh jat, resident of Nagla Jeevana, had taken the girl outside Bharatpur. On inquiry from his house, his whereabouts were not known. It was apprehended that the girl was induced by him and she was kidnapped for marriage by him. On this report, a case under Sections 363/366 IPC was registered. The prosecutrix mamta Kumari, aged 19 years was recovered by the Police Vide Ex. p. 2 from sankhru, Mathura. On arrest, her statement was recorded under Section 161 and also under Section 164 Cr. P. C. she was put to medical examination for the offence of rape as well for determination of age. As per the statement of prosecutrix in the Court the accused had asked her to go with him to faridabad in a jeep on the pretext that her marks would be increased and there she stayed with him for three days and rape was committed with her. Thereafter, he took her to Vashno Devi for a trip and came back to mathura and in Mathura she was caught by the Police. She stated her date of birth to be 15-7-1989. After collecting necessary evidence, challan was filed. In due course the case came up for trial. The accused appellant was charge sheeted for the offence under sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr. P. C. was recorded. In the statement, the accused explained that prosecutrix had gone with him with her consent. Her date of birth was 20-3-1985 as per the Transfer certificate of C. S. Modern School, bharatpur. He further explained that the parents of the girl were knowing the fact that the girl had gone with him and the girl used to love him too much. In defence, the accused has examined himself as D. W. 3, wherein he deposed hat he had married with the girl on 25-3-2003. In cross-examination, he has also deposed that the girl had love affairs with him. That apart, he has admitted that he was already married and his wife is suffering with paralysis and he had obtained a divorce from her and he had a daughter from his earlier marriage. Apart from himself, he has also examined D. W. 1 dr. Harendra Singh and D. W. 2 Dr. Lalit krishna Gotecher, in support of the fact that the prosecutrix was more than 18 years old as per ossification test.

(3.) HEARD counsel for the accused appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the record.