JAWARU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants accused are real brothers. They were tried before the trial court for offences under Sections 366, 342 and 323, I.P.C. along with one more accused Mangilal for abducting the prosecutrix Lehari and for wrongful confinement by keeping her in the house for nearly 18 days against her will by the accused. The complaint was directly filed in the Court by one Nagjiram brother-in-law cousin sister of Lehari.

(2.) Lehari was aged 22 years at the time of the commission of the offence. She was married but her husband had driven her out. Her parents even refused to keep her. Therefore she was living with Nagjiram the complainant. The trial Court relying upon the evidence of the prosecutrix found the present appellants-accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section 366 and 342, I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer 2 years rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 366, I.P.C. and 3 months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 342, I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. This order is challenged in this appeal by the appellants-accused.

(3.) Learned counsel Shri Niranjan Gaur for the appellant-accused has taken me through the entire evidence of the prosecutrix and Nagjiram. He submitted that it was a case of nataT for which the accused paid Rs. 14,000/- in support of the defence they have also examined the defence witnesses who have fully supported their defence. He submitted that the prosecutrix was not abducted by them but she had come on nataT and stayed voluntarily for couple of days along with the accused No.3 as his wife. However because of her nature arid character she left on her own and went to Nagjiram again and then only got the complaint filed directly before the Court. He pointed out that when the complaint was registered before the Magistrate the matter was sent for investigation under Section 163, Cr. P.C. for investigation. On completing the investigation the Police was satisfied that it was a case of nata and that she was not abducted nor wrongfully confined against her will by them. Therefore, final-report was submitted in favour of the accused. However the learned Magistrate after recording the evidence of the complainant Nagjiram and prosecutrix issued the process against the accused for the aforesaid offences and then committed the case to the Court of Sessions. He therefore submitted that it is a clear case of consent. There was no abduction she was a major lady at the time of the alleged offence and false case is filed by Nagjiram so that they have not to pay the amount of Rs. 14,000/- which they have taken from them on nataT of Lehari with accused No.3.