BALVEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.04.2013 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 192 of 2012 whereby appellant was held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and was sentenced to undergo three year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo two month additional imprisonment under Section 363 IPC; sentenced to undergo three year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo two month additional imprisonment under Section 366 IPC; and sentenced to undergo seven year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo three month additional imprisonment under Section 376 IPC.
(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that PW2 Karnail Singh got registered an FIR with police station Nanakmatha on 18.04.2012 stating therein that in the intervening night of 1st and 2nd of April, 2012, PW2 informant was sleeping in his house along with other family members including prosecutrix PW1; in the mid night, when PW2 Karnail Singh woke up for the purpose of relieving himself, he found that PW1 prosecutrix, aged about 13 years, was not present in the house; he disclosed it to all his family members; PW2 and other family members made search about prosecutrix in the night but in vain; on 02.04.2012 in the morning at about 06.00 a.m., PW7 Jagjeet Singh, son of Kulwant Singh and Sukhdev Singh son of Satnam Singh told PW2 that his daughter was being taken away by Balveer Singh, son of Gurdeep Singh, Gurdeep Singh son of Kashmir Singh and Banto Kaur, wife of Gurdeep Singh, resident of village Gyanpur Gauri, police station Nanakmatha and Kulwant Singh, son of Malkeet Singh and Kashmir Singh, son of Inder Singh by inducing her; it came to his knowledge that all the named accused were keeping her in their house, therefore, she could be recovered.
(3.) Prosecutrix was got recovered on 19.04.2012 and was produced before Additional Judicial Magistrate, Khatima on 19.04.2012 itself and her statement was got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by Additional Judicial Magistrate.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.