HAR NATH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr. P. C has been filed against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bundi, on 20. 10. 1981, in Sessions Case No. 34/1981, by which he convicted the accused appellants under Sections 342, 343 and 366 IPC and sentenced each of them to suffer rigorous-imprisonment for one and half year and a fine of Rs. 500/ -. In default of payment of fine to further undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that a report was lodged against the accused appellant and one Panchu at Police Station Hindoli, district Bundi, on 29th Nov. , 1980, by one Chhotu that his daughter Mst. Rami was abducted and kept in wrongful confinment by the accused appellants. F. I. R. No. 129/ 80 was registered and investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, the clothes of prosecutrix and she her-self was recovered. The prosecutrix was medically examined. The police recorded her statement under section 164 Cr. P. C. After completing the investigation, a challan was submitted by police under sections 366, and 376 I. P. C. against the accused appellants. The prosecution produced as many as seven witnesses in the Court of Sessions Judge and three witnesses were examined on the side of defence. After examining the accused-appellants under section 313 and hearing the arguments, the accused appelants were acquitted of the charge to have committed offence under section 376 I. P. C. but were convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.

(3.) P. W. 5 is Gopal, who according to prosecutrix accompanied her when she was taken by Harnath, Chhagna and Panchu. It may be stated that no cha-llan was filed against Panchu and Gopal. This witness is brother of Pushpa, who is wife of Chhagna, whom prosecutrix calls as her sister. In his examination-in-chief, this witness has stated that the prosecutrix inquired from him whether his sister Pushpa had come in the festival. He further states that prosecutrix told her that she would go with Harnath. Then, she on her own desire, accompanied with Harnath. He further states that he sat infront of the cycle and prosecutrix sat in back of the cycle, which was driven by Harnath. This witness was declared hostile by the prosecution. D. W. 1 Narain has stated in his examination-in-chief that he and Ram Chandra accompanied Harnath. Ram Chandra is brother of prosecutrix. Ram Chandra served them tea and enquired from Harnath whether he will be prepared to marry with prosecutrix. Harnath told him that he is unmarried and very poor person and further stated that no one will be prepared to marry him. D. W. 3 Heeralal has stated that one year before, he invited Chhotu, father of prosecutrix and his family for eating food, Harnath had also come.