PANCHABHAI MEVABHAI DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the appellants original accused, under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.07.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 451 of 2006, whereby the learned Judge has held the appellant original accused guilty for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of I.P. Code and convicted and sentenced the appellant original accused

(2.) The facts of the prosecution case are that on 7.6.2006 the daughter of the complainant, named, Bhavna, had gone for purchasing the vegetables at Krashnanagar Vegetable Market. However, she did not return at the home. The complainant had made search of victim, but, till mid night, she could not be found out. Therefore, on 8.6.2006 the complainant informed Naroda Police Station that his daughter had gone for purchasing vegetables, but, she did not return back. It is alleged that the wife of the complainant, viz. Minaben, had taken divorce from the complainant and victim Bhavna was going to meet her mother often. On being inquired at the house of Minaben, they came to know that accused has, by giving false promises and inducement that he would marry the victim, eloped with her and kidnapped her from the vegetable market. Therefore, the complainant filed complaint on 16.6.2006 before the Naroda Police Station. Thereafter, necessary investigation was carried out by the Police. The statements of the witnesses were recorded on 16.6.2006. Thereafter, on 16.7.2006 the victim and accused were found from the house of one Pratapji Thakor, at Thakorvas, Ognaj. The Panchnama of the said house was drawn. The appellant accused was arrested and thereafter the accused and the victim were sent to the Civil Hospital for physical examination. Muddamal was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Thereafter, after completing necessary procedure, the charge-sheet was filed in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate. As the offence was exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the said case to the Court of Sessions at Ahmedabad.

(3.) Thereafter, the charge against the accused was framed vide Exh. 4 for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of I.P. Code. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.