EMPEROR Vs. SITAL PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sital Prasad, Ram Swarath, and Ram Tawakkal, Brahmans by caste, have appealed from their conviction of an offence under Section 366, Indian Penal Code. The charge against them was one of kidnapping a minor girl, Musammat Rajpatia, 8 years of age, from thy custody of her lawful guardian Musammat Chaudarkali, in order to compel her to marry a person against her will. The willingness or otherwise of a minor Hindu girl to marry a particular person is not a matter for consideration at the time of her marriage, so it will be difficult to make a distinction between a marriage by the agency of a kidnapper and a marriage with the help of her relations so far as her own personal desire and consent are concerned. This, however, is a point of small significance because in the event of the taking away of the girl being proved, the persons found guilty of kidnapping her would be guilty of an offence under Section 363, Indian Penal Code, which provides for a substantial punishment. Musammat Rajpatia is a sister of Musammat Chandarkali s deceased husband, Bikarmajit, and her father and the father of Ram Tawakkal appellant were own brothers. The fathers of both Musammat Rajpatia and Ram Tawakkal are dead. There are two minor brothers of Musammat Rajpatia alive. The case for the prosecution was that the three appellants went to the apartment of Musammat Chandarkali on the night of the 28th of April, last, picked up the minor girl, Musammat Rajpatia, who was sleeping by her aunt s side, and ran away.

(2.) [His Lordship then set forth further facts of the case.] I have read the evidence on the record and considered the circumstances of the alleged arrest of the appellants, Sital Prasad and Ram Swarath. I am satisfied that the prosecution story of the taking away of the girl is false.

(3.) [His Lordship then discussed the evidence.]