DAYA SHANKAR TRIPATHI, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel (Amicus-Curiae) for the appellant-accused, learned AGA and perused the material placed on record. Appellant has assailed the judgment and order dated 24.05.2016 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (MAHILA SAMBANDHI) (F.T.C.-I), Mathura in Sessions Trial No.67 of 2013 (State Vs. Survir @ Tenta @ Govind) arising out of Case Crime No.189 of 2012, under Sections 363 , 366 , 376 IPC Police Station Magorra, District Mathura, by which the appellant has been convicted under Sections 363 , 366 and 376 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of four years and fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 363 IPC, rigorous imprisonment of six years and fine of Rs.3,000/- under Section 366 IPC and rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs.3,000/- under Section 376 IPC (in default of payment of fine, four months additional simple imprisonment).
(2.) In the present judgment, I do not propose to mention the name of the victim girl in view of the provisions of Section 228A I.P.C. and in pursuance of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para-4 in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Shree Kant Shekari (AIR 2004 SC 4404) the prosecutrix (hereinafter referred to as 'victim').
(3.) Prosecution case, in brief, is that informant Jagdish son of Late Sri Buddhiram, resident of Village Saunkh, P.S. Magorra, District Mathura submitted a written Tahrir (Ext. Ka-1) before the police station concerned, narrating therein that accused-Survir @ Tenta @ Govind, his brother Shripal, sons of Soran Singh, resident of Summergarhi, Etah had enticed away his daughter (victim) aged about 12 years from Kumher Adda, Saunkh. Brother-in-law of accused-persons, namely Malkhan was also with them who is resident of village Kalai, District Aligarh. Occurrence had taken place on 22.08.2012 at about 4.00 P.M. Information regarding incident was given to Police Chauki Saunkh immediately and complainant was searching the victim at his own level also but victim has not been traced out. Hence, it is requested that his report should be lodged and the victim should be recovered.;