MOHD MUBARAK ALI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH prosecution was launched also against Abdul Rauf along with the appellants but due to his absconsion from the proceeding, trial commenced only against Md. Mubarak Ali, Md. Sirajul, Haji Bhonu and Manzoor Hajam. All of them stood charged under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and Mubarak Aii also stood charged under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court on appreciation of evidences placed on the record while acquitted Haji Bhonu and Manzoor Hajam, rendered verdict of guilt against Md. Mubarak Ali and Sirajul under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. Md. Mubarak Ali also suffered conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with direction that sentences passed against the appellant Md. Mubarak Ali shall run concurrently.

(2.) THE accusation appearing from the written report of Fakirchand Chaudhary was that after he found Anju Kumari missing from the house, made hectic searches for her when he was informed by Ganaur Sah (P.W. 1) about he having noticed Anju Kumari in the company of Md. Mubarak Ali, Abdul Rauf and Sirajul at Samastipur Railway Station on 21st November, 1988 and with these assertions a police case was instituted at Pupri Police Station, on strength of which First Information Report was drawn up and investigation commenced and pursuant to the commencement of the investigation, the police officer recorded statement of witnesses under Section 161, Cr.P.C., visited place of occurrence depute a police officer to Assam to effect recovery of missing girl where she was reported to have been taken, and on restoration of victim girl from Assam, she was clinically examined by the doctor and eventually chargesheet was laid before the Court. In the eventual trial, that commenced pursuant to commitment of the case to the Court of Session, the prosecution examined altogether nine witnesses who include father and brother of the victim girl, doctor and host of other witnesses.

(3.) ANJU Kumari P.W. 6 who happens to be the victim girl would state that she had gone to Appellant No. 1 for study along with Ragani and Pushpa and while Ragani and Pushpa were asked to complete their task, she was detained by appellant Mubarak Ali who asked her to accompany him to Muzaffarpur and it is how that she was taken by the appellant in his company. She would state that the Appellant No. 1 took her to his house where other appellants joined him and she was eventually taken to Bajpatti Railway Station where Manzoor Hajam left their company. She stated that after she was taken to Samastipur Railway Station, she was ravished by Mubarak Ali and there Sirajul left their company, pursuant to which Mubarak Ali and others took her to Assam where she was confined in the house of Abdul Rauf and there too Mubarak Ali violated her person on false pretext of marrying her. Her signature was also secured by the appellants putting her in fear of death on some plain piece of paper and it was after 7 or 8 days that she was recovered by the police from the house of Abdul Rauf. Mubarak Ali and Abdul Rauf were also nabbed by the police.