DEEPAK MAHESHWARI,J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred on behalf of accused-appellant Raju @ Rajkumar to challenge the judgment dated 27.6.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Sessions Case No. 181/2013. Learned trial court has convicted the accused-Rajkumar for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC as also for the offence punishable under Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act'). The accused was sentenced for the aforesaid offences in the following manner:- JUDGEMENT_104_LAWS(RAJ)8_2017_1.html
(2.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellant as also learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the judgment impugned and material available on record.
(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that PW-3 Bhagwan Singh filed a written report Ex.-P/5 on 10.11.2013 at Mahila Police Station, Dholpur stating therein that on 8.11.2013 his niece, aged about 14 years, went to the field adjoining the village to attend natural call in the morning. The accused-Rajkumar, his mother-Sheela, grand-mother and father-Pramod kidnapped his niece with some malafide intention. On tracing, sister-in-law of complainant namely Guddi told him that the girl had gone to attend natural call alongwith mother and grand-mother of the accused and thereafter did not return. Dayashankar also stated to have seen the girl (prosecutrix) going out of the village along with Rajkumar, Sheela, Pramod and grand-mother of Rajkumar. On making inquiry, Sheela and grand-mother of Rajkumar admitted that Rajkumar had taken away niece of the complainant. On the said report, FIR No. 275/2013 was lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366A IPC. After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against Raju @ Rajkumar for the offences under Sections 363, 366A and 376 IPC as also under Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act.;