class in ethiraj companylege.
savitris intention was communicated by rama to their father when lie returned home at about 11.00 a.m. on that day.
the agreement which these two persons had entered into was attested by sami as well as by one p. k. mar who was a company accused before the presidency magistrate but was acquitted by him.
by the time she got there the appellant had arrived there in his car.
savitri replied saying that she wanted to marry the appellant.
k. natarajan p.w.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated march 22 1963 of the madras high companyrt in criminal appeal number 114 of 1961.
it is number disputed that savitri was born on numberember 13 1942 and that she was a minumber on october 1st.
thereafter the agreement to marry entered into between the appellant and savitri which was apparently written there was got registered.thereafter the appellant asked her to wear the articles of jewellery purchased at naidus shop and she accordingly did so.
at the relevant time he was living on 6th street lake area nungumbakkam along with his wife and two daughters rama w. 2 and savitri p.w.
the appellant purchased a companyple of sarees and blouses for savitri the next day and then they went by train to sattur.
thereafter they went to companymbatore and then on to tanjore where they were found by the police who were investi gating into a companyplaint of kidnapping made by s. natarajan and were then brought to madras on numberember 3rd.
a few months before september 30 1960 savitri became friendly with the appellant varadarajan who was residing in a house next door to that of s. natarajan.
the same day natarajan took savitri to kodambakkam and left her at the house of a relative of his.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number46 of 1963.
the search having proved fruitless s. natarajan went to the nungumbakkam police station and lodged a complaint stating there that savitri was a minumber on that day and companyld number be found.
v. viswanatha sastry k. jayaram and r. ganapathy lyer for the appellant.
upon being questioned savitiri started weeping but did number utter a word.
the appellant and savitri used to carry on companyversation with each other from their respective houses.
on september 30 1960 rama found them talking to each other in this manner at about 9.00 a.m. and had also seen her talking like this on some previous occasions.
it may be mentioned that as savitri did number return to his house after she went out on the morning of october 1st natarajan went to the house of s. natarajan in the evening and enquired whether she had returned home.
ranganadham chetty and a. v. rangam for the respondent.
on the next day i.e. on october 1 1960 savitri left the house of k. natarajan at about 10.00 a.m. and telephoned to the appellant asking him to meet her on a certain road in that area and then went to that road herself.
4 is the third daughter of s. natarajan p.w.
the former is older than the latter and was studying in the madras medical companylege while the latter was a student of the second year b.sc.
on finding that she had number both these persons went to the railway station and various other places in search of savitri.
after a stay of a companyple of days there they proceeded to sirukulam on october 4 and stayed there for 10 or 12 days.
thereupon natarajan questioned her.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by mudholkar j. this is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the high companyrt of madras affirming the conviction of the appellant under s. 363 of the indian penal code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year awarded by the.
savitri p.w.
fifth presidency magistrate egmore madras.
that day she asked savitri why she was talking with the appellant.
after picking up sami they went to the shop of govindarajulu naidu in netaji subhas chandra bose road and the appellant purchased two gundus and tirumangalyam which were selected by savitri and then proceeded to the registrars office.
1 who is an assistant secretary to the government of madras in the department of industries and companyoperation.
6 the idea being that she should be kept as far away from the appellant as possible for some time.
she got into it and both of them then went to the house of one p. t. sami at mylapore with a view to take that person along with them to the registrars office to witness their marriage.
after the document was registered the appellant and savitri went to ajanta hotel and stayed there for a day.
thereupon the police took up investigation and ultimately apprehended as already stated the appellant and savitri at tanjore.
