Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 29.2.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ F.T.C., Lucknow in S.T. no. 298 of 2015 (State v. Zeeshan Ahmed) arising out of case crime no. 363 of 2011 under sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC, P.S. Wazirganj, Lucknow, by which appellant was convicted for the charges under sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and was convicted for three years' rigorous imprisonment for charge under section 363 IPC, for three years' rigorous imprisonment for charge under section 366 IPC and for 10 years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- for charge under section 376 IPC.
(2.) The prosecution case in brief was that on 23.12.2011, the minor daughter of complainant Mohd. Qurban Ali, namely, Sania Ali @ Saba had eloped from her house, then on suspicion, the complainant had lodged report in police against accused Zeeshan Ahmed. During investigation the victim Sania was recovered and had stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C about her kidnapping by accused. After competition of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against accused for offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC. In trial the accused was charged for these offences to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Then in support of charges, prosecution side had examined PW-1 Mohd Qurban Ali (complainant), PW-2 Rashida Bano (mother of the victim), PW-3 Dr. Nutan Sonkar, PW-4 Sania (victim), P.W-5 Dr. A.P. Verma, P.W.6 S.I. Rajesh Singh (I.O.) and PW-7 C.P. Rajesh Singh. These witnesses had proved prosecution documents as Exhibits-Ka-1 to Ka-10.
(3.) In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. accused Zeeshan Ahmed had denied the allegations against him and the facts of the charge and pleaded that he is innocent. Defence side had not adduced any defence evidence.;