LAWS(JHAR)-2011-12-28

MANOJ PANDEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On December 05, 2011
Manoj Pandey Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.09.2001 and 24.09.2001 respectively passed by learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 362 of 1997 convicting the appellants under Sections 364A and 365 of I.P.C. and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs. 5000/- each, failing which to undergo S.I. for two years under Section 364A I.P.C., and to undergo R.I. for five years under Section 365 of I.P.C. and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for one year. However, the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that P.W.-4 Hari Prasad, grandfather of victim (Sarika Kumari) lodged a fard beyan on 29.11.1996 that on 21.10.1996 after conclusion of Navratra Puja her grand-daughter-Sarika Kumari (victim) aged about 18 years was missing from the house. The family members tried to find her out. The appellant Manoj Pandey also eloped, but he came after two days and said that there was no need to lodge case etc. and if he perform Puja, Sarika will return. Thereafter he started making phone calls for the said purpose. On inquiry, the informant learnt that Manoj Pandey was a fraud person. On inquiry, appellant no. 1 asked Rs. 31,000/- as Dakshina for bringing back the victim girl. When the informant party showed their inability to pay the amount, Manoj Pandey told that in lieu of money, jewellery can be given, which can be returned when cash is paid. It is further alleged that appellant no. 2, Karu Pandey, the relative of appellant no. 1, impressed that Manoj Pandey is a saint having divine powers. Due to fear of bad name in the society, the case was not lodged immediately. When the informant party learnt that the victim was in Dadpur, they went and lodged this F.I.R. at Akbarpur Police Station. They also brought appellant no. 2 Karu Pandey with them.

(3.) The prosecution examined five witnesses. P.W.-1 Amar Kumar Sao is the uncle of victim, P.W.-2 Rajendra Prasad Sao is the father of the victim, P.W.-3 Kalawati Devi is the mother of victim, P.W.-4 is the informant, P.W.-5 Ashok Kumar, ASI posted at Akbarpur Police Station where the F.I.R. was lodged. He is a formal witness. It appears that the I.O. has not been examined in this case due to paralysis. It further appears that the victim is traceless till today.