JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This application has been filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.
seeking leave to file an appeal against judgment of acquittal dated 10.5.2010.
Respondent No.2 was arrayed as an accused in FIR No.374 dated
8.10.2010 police station Mohindergarh, for commission of offences under
Sections 363, 366-A and 376 IPC. It was an allegation against him that he had
enticed away daughter of the applicant on 28.9.2010. Despite efforts made
when girl could not be traced out, applicant reported the matter to the police.
(2.) Then he came to know that his daughter has been sent to Nari Niketan from
where she will be produced in Court on 1.10.2010. The SDM concerned told
him to produce his daughter again on 6.10.2010. On 8.10.2010 girl
accompanied the complainant Vinod Kumar to the police station. Under
direction of the police she was produced before Magistrate on 9.10.2010,
where her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The prosecutrix
was medico legally examined by PW1 Dr.Anjali Soni on 9.10.2010. Accused
was arrested on 10.10.2010. He was also got medico legally examined by
Dr.Vikesh Tekwani (PW9). The investigating officer (PW13) Bijender Singh
recorded statements of the witnesses and on completion of investigation final
report was put in Court. Copies of the documents were supplied to the accused
as per norms. Case was committed to the competent Court for trial, where the
respondent accused was charge sheeted to which he pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial.
(3.) To prove its case the prosecution produced 13 witnesses and also
brought on record documentary evidence. On conclusion of prosecution's
evidence statement of the respondent-accused was recorded under Section 313
Cr.P.C. Incriminating material existing on record was put to him, which he
refuted, claimed innocence and false implication. He rather stated that the
prosecutrix had met him accidentally at Mahabir Chowk Narnaul. She
informed him that she had left the house due to misbehavior of her mother.
Despite efforts made, she refused to go back. Then some altercation took place
between the accused and the prosecutrix. Public gathered at the spot and the
police arrested him. Later on a false case was registered against him under
Section 109 Cr.P.C. and thereafter he was involved in the present case. He also
led evidence in defence.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.