IZAZUDDIN ALIAS IZA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the accused Iza or Izazuddin has been acquitted by the verdict of four Jurors out of five on charges under Section 366 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code, i.e., upon the charge of having on the 18 of December, 1926, abducted a Hindu Brahmin widow Hemlata and kidnapped her from lawful custody.

(2.) The facts are that on the night in question, according to the evidence of the mother, the girl wanted to go outside the house for the purpose of relieving nature and that the mother went with her. According to one version of the story both of them went outside to relieve nature. The mother's story is that when the girl had finished she was seized by hands and feet by two men--the accused Iza and one Sriram, and they carried her off then and there, that she awoke the members of the house-hold and certain neighbours and that Girindra and a servant and some one else gave chase. The story of Girindra is that three men were seen running into Iza's house. According to another witness five men were seen. According to the servant no mention is made of these men at all in his evidence-in-chief. There can, however, be no doubt that the girl on that night did go to the house of the accused Iza. The question is whether or not Iza went there and whether he took her by force, there being no case of enticement which we have to consider.

(3.) The fact is that no First Information Report was laid until five days afterwards and the reasons for that have been given by the witness Girindra. They do not appear to be very good reasons. He tells a story of having gone to Iza's house and having argued with him, of having been taken to the prostitute's quarter and of having ultimately failed to find Hemlata. He then came back and sent for the father and after the father had tried to get her back asking the Muhammadan matbars they came to the conclusion that they had better lodge the First Information.