THRIMURTHULU Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is convicted for the offence under Sec. 366 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years vide judgment in S.C.No.556 of 2007 dtd. 29/4/2010 passed by the VI Additional Senior Civil Judge, Fast Track Court, at Medchal, Ranga Reddy District. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that P.W.3 who is the victim girl, was working as tailor in Comfort Garments Factory at Gundalpochampally area. The appellant was also working as tailor in the very same factory. Since both were working in the same factory, they had acquaintance. On 12/8/2006, P.W.3 left her house and while she was at the bus stop, the appellant came in an auto and offered to give lift in the auto. She boarded the auto and auto was going in a different direction. When questioned, the appellant expressed his love for her and stated that he wanted to marry her. Though she requested the driver to stop, driver did not hear and increased the speed. When P.W.3 shouted for help while sitting in the auto, the appellant beat her on her head. She was taken to a house and confined in the room and threatened with stick and knife stating that if she shouts, the appellant would kill her father and brother. Due to fear, she did not make any attempt to escape from the room and nor shouted for help.

(3.) On the next day, the appellant received phone call from PW3's brother. The appellant answered the call stating that both were getting married and he would take P.W.3 to Mumbai. However, P.W.3 was not allowed to talk to her brother on phone. Thereafter, they shifted to the house of the appellant's elder brother in an auto. During that time, the elder brother was not there in the house and on the next day, the brother came and advised the appellant to go to the police station. However, having come to know that the police visited the factory, the appellant took P.W.3 to the room where they stayed initially on 12/8/2006. At the instance of the appellant, she wrote a letter saying that she had gone willfully with the appellant and thereafter, the appellant let her free. However, the appellant locked the door outside and went away as he came to know that the police had traced the location. After the appellant left, the police went to the room and rescued P.W.3.