SUNIL KUMAR GARG - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the accused-appellants against the judgment and order dated 26-2-1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 13/99 by which he acquitted the accused Anna Kunwar and Prem Kunwar of the charge for the offence under Section 376/114, I.P.C. and also acquitted accused-appellant Arjun Singh of the charges for the offence under Sections 366 and 363, I.P.C. and also acquitted accused-appellants Kishan Singh and Onkar Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 363, I.P.C., but convicted the present accused-appellants Kishan Singh and Onkar Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 366, I.P.C. and Arjun Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentenced them in the following manner: Name of accused appellants Convicted under section Sentence awarded 1. Kishan Singh 366, IPC Five years' RI and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months' RI.
(2.) Onkar Singh
(3.) Arjun Singh 376, IPC Ten years' RI and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year RIIt arises in the following circumstances:- On 31-10-1998 at about 5.30 p.m., P.W.3, Santosh Kunwar w/o Amar Singh (P.W. 4) lodged a written report Ex. P/2 in the Police Station Goverdhan vilas District Udaipur stating inter alia that P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar (hereinafter referred to as the prosecutrix) is her sister and she came to her village Matun on 20-10-1998. It was further stated in the report that on 29-10-1998 at about 7.00 p.m., accused-appellant Kishan Singh came to her house and told her that her mother Bhanwar Kunwar, who was residing at Bheem, was not feeling well and her mother had called prosecutrix P.W.1 Manju Kunwar. It was further stated in the report that accused-appellant Kishan Singh further told that her Tau (accused-appellant Onkar Singh) would also go to Bheem by vehicle at 8.00 p.m. and placing reliance on accused-appellant Kishan Singh, P.W. 3 Santosh Kunwar sent prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar with him and at the time when prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar was sent with accused-appellant Kishan Singh, her mother-in-law Gulab Kunwar and Jethani kailash Kunwar were also there. It was further stated in the report that she had come to know that both accused-appellants Kishan Singh and Onkar Singh did not take prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar to Bheem, but they took her to village Tanna Bhagal, where prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar was compelled to marry with accused-appellant Arjun Singh and at that time, prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar was only 13 years of age and thus, she was minor. It was further stated in the report that prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar was compelled to marry with accused-appellant Arjun Singh against her will. On this report, police registered the case and chalked out regular FIR Ex. P/3 and started investigation. During investigation, prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar was got medically examined by P.W. 2 Dr. G. L. Dad and her medical examination report is Ex. P/1. The accused-appellants Onkar Singh and Arjun Singh were arrested on 15-11-1998 through arrest memos Ex. P/7 and Ex. P/8 respectively and accused-appellant Kishan Singh was arrested on 15-12-1998 through arrest memo Ex. P/9. After usual investigation, police submitted challan against the present accused-appellants and two more accused, namely, Anna Kunwar and Prem Kunwar in the Court of Magistrate, from where the case was committed to the Court of Session. On 22-1-1999, the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur framed charges for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376, I.P.C. against the accused-appellant Arjun Singh; for the offence under Sections 363 and 366, I.P.C. against the accused-appellants Onkar Singh and Kishan Singh; and for the offence under Section 376/114, I.P.C. against accused Prem Kunwar and Anna Kunwar. The charges were read over and explained to all the accused. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in support of its case examined five witnesses and got exhibited some documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused under Section 313, Cr. P. C. were recorded. In defence, no evidence was led by the accused. After conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge through his judgment and order dated 26-2-1999 acquitted the accused Anna Kunwar and Prem Kunwar of the charge for the offence under Section 376/114, I.P.C. and also acquitted accused-appellant Arjun Singh of the charges for the offence under Sections 366 and 363, I.P.C. and also acquitted accused-appellants Kishan Singh and Onkar Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 363, I.P.C., but convicted the present accused-appellants Kishan Singh and Onkar Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 366, I.P.C. and Arjun Singh of the charge for the offence under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentenced them in the manner as indicated above. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 26-2-1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur, this appeal has been filed by the present accused-appellants. 3. In this appeal, the only submission which has been raised by the learned counsel for the accused-appellants is that from the statement of the prosecutrix P.W. 1 Manju Kunwar herself, no case of rape as well as abduction is made out and all accused-appellants are entitled to acquittal.;