Order on Board

10.01.2023

1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section

374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against judgment dated 15.11.2000 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in Session Trial No. 01/2000, wherein the said court convicted the appellant for commission of offence under Section 363 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I.

for 1 year and fine of Rs. 300/- with further default stipulations.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on fateful day on

22.09.1999, the victim left her house for attending school, but when she reached near Hanuman temple, the appellant took her in the bicycle for watching movie and when she refused, the appellant threatened her that he has taken her snap which will be circulated and he will destroy her reputation, therefore, she joined him. The appellant has taken her to near Sindhi school where another accused namely Dhaneshwar Sahu was present. Dhaneshwar Sahu took the school bag of the victim while he was driving the bicycle, thereafter they reached to Samrat Talkies and watched the movie and later on they went to Mahadeo Ghat where another accused Kiran met and despite the objection raised by the victim, they cut her hair influencing her for marriage thereafter they left her and went to their house.

3. Further case of the prosecution is that till evening hours, the victim remained in Motipur ground having wear school uniform. Balla Yadav who was resident of that village took the victim to his house and informed this fact to village Kotwar. On third day of incident i.e. on 24.09.1999, she was sent to Police Station- Purani Basti by Balla Yadav. On the other hand, her father (PW- 2) who is working as peon in the school after verifying the absence of the victim, in the evening enquired about his girl with in-laws, but when she was not traceable then he lodged missing report before Police Station- Golbazar (Ex. P/3). The statement of the victim was recorded in Police Station- Purani Basti thereafter Ex. P/6 was written by Police Station- Golbazar and the matter was transferred to Police Station- Purani Basti, wherein Sub-Inspector has investigated the matter and during investigation, as per school report, the date of birth of the victim is 05.07.1983 as such, the victim was minor on the date of incident, therefore, after investigation, final report was submitted.

4. The learned trial Court has framed charge against the appellant and other co-accused namely Kiran Kumar, Dhaneshwar for commission of offence punishable under Sections 366 & 363 of IPC. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of appellant and other co-accused have exhibited documents namely Supurdnama (Ex. P/1), Seizure memo (Ex. P/2), Rojnamcha Sanha (Ex. P/3), FIR (Ex. P/4), Najri Naksha (Ex. P/5), FIR along with final report (Ex. P/6), letter dated 24.09.1999 written by the Principal, Salem Girls Higher Secondary School (Ex. P/6A).

5. The prosecution to prove their case has examined the victim (PW-1), father of the victim Raghunath Singh Chouhan (PW-2), Jivrakhan Lal Dhruv (PW-3), Shivadhar Singh (PW-4), M.L. Patil (PW-5), Sub-Inspector Goutam Singh Sahu (PW-6), Biselal (PW- 7), Balla Yadav (PW-8), Ms. I.S. Tirkey (PW-9) & Omprakash Dewangan (PW-10).

6. The prosecution to prove age of the prosecution has examined PW-9 who is Principal of Salem Girls Higher Secondary School, Raipur, wherein she has stated in her examination-in-chief that the victim has taken admission in her school on 22.06.1999 and she has also brought the original register and according to which, date of birth of the victim is 05.07.1983 and on the basis of the same, she has given this information (Ex. P/7) and also put her signature. This witness in her cross-examination has stated that the Dakhil Kharij register has not been written by her whereas the same has been written by one Ms. V. Tirkey. She has also admitted that Ms. V. Tirkey has made entry in the register on the basis of T.C