The conviction and sentences for the offences under Section 366 IPC and Section 376 IPC were upheld. The conviction for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act was set aside.

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Mehta, J. - The appellant Vinod Kumar stands convicted and sentenced as below vide Judgment dated 20.06.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.17/2009:-

2. Being aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment, he has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., 1973

3. Brief facts are that Ramlal Singh son of Inder Singh by caste Baori lodged a written complaint at the Police Station Sangaria, District Hanumangarh alleging inter alia that he was having four unmarried daughters, of which Mst. 'S' aged 13 years and Mst. 'R' aged 11 years (hereinafter referred to as 'the victims') had gone missing from the house in the night, taking with them a sum of Rs. 300/- and a dress each. He prayed for search of his missing daughters. On this complaint, a Missing Persons Report No.02/2009 was lodged at the Police Station Sangariya and investigation commenced. On 07.01.2009, information was received from the RPF, Udaipur about the missing victims on which, the complainant and his brothers were taken to the GRP Udaipur who had traced out the missing victims. The girls were present at the GRP Outpost, Pratap Nagar. Upon inquiry, they disclosed that they had been lured away by Vinod Kumar who had subjected them to sexual assault. On the basis of this disclosure made by the victims, an FIR No.14/2009 was registered at the Police Station Sangaria for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the IPC and section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act and investigation commenced. After investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the appellant herein for the above offences.

4. The offences were exclusively triable by the Special Court, SC/ST Act Cases and thus, the case was committed to the said court. The Trial Judge framed charges against the appellant for the above offences. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 35 documents in support of its case. The appellant, upon being examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 denied the prosecution allegations and claimed that he had gone to Udaipur for the job of furniture making and that the girls had followed him of their own free will and volition. No evidence was led in defence. After considering the submissions advanced on behalf of defence and the prosecution and, after minutely appreciating the evidence available on record, the trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above. Hence, this appeal.

5. Shri Kulwant Singh, learned counsel representing the appellant, did not seriously question the veracity of the evidence of the two victims Mst 'S' and Mst. 'R' (PW-1 and PW-2 respectively) but, contended that it is a case wherein, the girls, who were infatuated with the accused, voluntarily followed him to Udaipur and sexual relations too were established without any force, threat, duress or allurement and as such, the appellant deserves leniency on the aspect of sentences. He further urged that the prosecution failed to lead cogent, convincing and clinching evidence so as to prove that the girls were minors as on the date of incident and thus, the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to the appellant for the offence under Section 376 IPC deserves to be reduced suitably. He further contended that as, there is no allegation of the prosecution that the appellant, took away or established sexual relations with the girls with the intention that he was committing th