- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned, Public Prosecutor.
(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th Sept. 95 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ratanagarh (Churu) in Sessions Case No. 42/73 State v. Rakesh. By the aforesaid judgment the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge convicted the appellant Rakesh under Sections 366 and 376, I.P.C. and the appellant Vinod alias Vinodia under Section 366A, I.P.C. The accused persons were sentenced as mentioned below :- (1) Accused Rakesh - (a) under Sections 376, I.P.C. Rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 100/- and further rigorous imprisonment for three months for default in payment of fine. (b) Under Section 366, I.P.C. - Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 100/- and further rigorous imprisonment for three months for default in payment of fine. (2) Accused Vinod - Under Section 366-A, I.P.C. - Rigorous imprisonement for seven years and fine of Rs. 100/- and further rigorous imprisonment for three months for default in payment of fine. The sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant Rakesh under Sections 366 and 376, I.P.C. were ordered to run concurrently.
(3.) The facts of the case may be briefly stated as below :- On 3rd Nov. 1992 at 4 p.m. Manakchand, aged 60 years, resident of Dungargarh Bhomasar Bas, lodged the First Information Report (Ex. P/8) at Police Station, Dungargarh. In the First Information Report (Ex.P/8), Manakchand stated that on 3rd Nov. 92, as usual he started from his house at 5 a.m. for going to the temple of Shri Ramdeoji, where he worked as a Pujari. On that day at about 7 a.m. his younger daughter Ku. Premlata, went to the temple where he was working and asked him whether Bhatu had reached the temple, Bhatu was the elder daughter of Manakchand. According to the First Information Report when Manackchand inquired from his younger daughter Premlata as to what was the matter, he was told that about one hour ago Rakesh Harijan and one other boy went to the house (of Manakchand) and told Ku. Bhagwati that her father had fallen in the temple and received injuries on his head and, on receiving this information from Rakesh Ku. Bhagwati accompanied him and went away from the house. It was further mentioned in the F.I.R. (Ex. P/8) that Premlata informed the complainant Manakchand that when she told about the aforesaid incident to her mother, her mother asked her to go to the temple and find out what was the matter. It was further mentioned in the F.I.R. (Ex.P/8) that the complainant Manakchand made inquires about Rakesh, but he was not available at his house. Thereafter, he went to the Bus Station and there he was told by some persons that Rakesh, resident of Dungargarh and his relative Vinod resident of Sadulpur and a girl were seen at the Bus Stand, but thereafter, it could not be traced out where they went. in the First Information Report, the age of Bhatu alias Bhagwati was reported to be 16 years. ;