RAM NATH YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.7.1996 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 195 of 1994 whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant No. 1 Ram Nath Yadav for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years for the offence under Section 363 of the IPC and R.I. for a period of 10 years for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC with fine of Rs. 5000/ - (five thousand) in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of 3 years. The appellant No.2 Sanath Manjhi was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 368 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 2 years.

(2.) THE prosecution case as it appears is that the informant (PW -6) Raghu Sah gave a fardbeyan on 2.1.1994 (Ext. 4) to the affect that appellant Ram Nath Yadav was working at t1is sweet meat shop, situated at Hansdiha Dumka Road. His daughter Rinku Kumari (PW -7) aged about 12 -13 years came to his shop. It is said that Ram Nath Yadav used to visit informant's house frequently in connection with the business of the shop and in that course he developed familiarity with his daughter Rinku Kumari. He further stated in his fardbeyan that four days prior to 2.1.1994 the appellant Ram Nath Yadav was missing from his shop and after some time his daughter Rinku Kumari was also missing from the said shop. Since the informant found them to be traceless and, as such, he lodged the case before the police stating therein that the appellant Ram Nath Yadav has kidnapped his minor daughter Rinku Kumari. On the basis of the said report the F.I.R. was registered and investigation was taken up. In course of investigation on 9.1.1994 the victim girl Rinku Kumari was found at village Daulatpur in the house of the maternal uncle of the appellant Ram Nath Yadav. The information regarding the presence of the victim Rinku Kumari at village Daulatpur was given to the informant by one Gopal relative of the appellant Ram Nath Yadav. The informant went to the village Daulatpur alongwith his wife and Gopal and they found the appellant Ram Nath Yadav and his daughter Rinku Kumari there at Daulatpur in the house of the maternal uncle of the appellant no. 1 Ram Nath Yadav. The victim was brought from there and then was produced before the police. She was medically examined by a lady doctor (PW. 4) and her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC. was recorded by (PW.1) Judicial Magistrate, Dumka.

(3.) THE appellant no. 1 Ram Nath Yadav was charged for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code whereas appellant no. 2 Sanath Manjhi was charged for the offence punishable under Section 368 of the Indian Penal Code only. The trial court acquitted the appellant no. 1 Ram Nath Yadav from the charge under Section 366A of the IPC but convicted him for the offence under Sections 363 and 376 of the IPC as stated earlier.