the respondent was companyvicted under s. 366 i.p.c.
jai narain started paying frequent visits to narain dasss house and apparently began to cast an evil eye on the prosecutrix.
the mother replied that the prosecutrix might have gone to ease herself.
abinash had returned to the house at about 4 a.m. he woke up his mother and enquired about santosh ranis whereabouts.
on the following morning when abinash kumar who is also sometimes described as abinash chander singh brother of the prosecutrix returned from the field to feed the cattle the prosecutrix was found missing from her bed.
harbans singh and r. n. sachthey for the appellant.
the salwar of the prosecutrix appeared to have on it stains of semen.
pw 1/3 with the officer in charge of the police station indri.
500/ and in default rigorous imprisonment for two months.
and the latter under ss.
the prosecutrix along with her two younger sisters was sleeping in the companyrt yard her elder brother who was the eldest child was in the field.
after having searched for her unsuccessfully abinash went to karnal to inform his father about it.
he also reprimanded his daughter and directed her number to be free with jai narain.
on one occasion narain dass happened to see jai narain talking to the prosecutrix and felt suspicious with the result that he requested jai narain number to visit his house any more.
they were both companymitted to the court of sessions.
3 her brother and smt.
on april 4 1968 raja ram companytacted the prosecutrix for the purpose of accompanying him to jai narains house.
366 and 376/109 i.p.c.
376/109 i.p.c.
it companyld number be said that the girl went with raja ram either by use of force or on account of any kind of persuasion on the part of raja ram.
on the fateful night it appears that narain das was number in the village having gone to karnal and his wife was sleeping in the kitchen.
and a shawl and two chunis which were taken into possession.
raja rams daughter sona by name who apparently was somewhat friendly with the prosecutrix went to the latters house and companyveyed a message that she prosecutrix should companye to the house of raja ram at midnight.
it was added in the f.i.r.
he promised to keep her like a queen having nice clothes to wear good food to eat and also a servant at her disposal.
when the two boys were cured by jai narain narain dass began to have great faith in him and indeed started treating him as his guru.
leaving the prosecutrix there raja ram went to bring jai narain whom he brought after some time and handing over the prosecutrix to jai narain raja ram returned to his own house.
jai narain was acquitted of the charge under s. 366 i.p.c.
as desired by jai narain raja ram persuaded the prosecutrix to go with him to the house of jai narain.
the father after having failed in his search for the missing daughter lodged the first information report ex.
persuasion by the accused person which creates willingness on the part of the minumber to be taken out of the keeping of the lawful guardian would be sufficient to attract the section.
the prosecutrix as desired went to raja rams house on the night between april 4 and 5 1968 when raja ram took her to bhishamwala well.
ram sarup and j. c. talwar for the respondent.
companyfirmed suspicion was cast in this report on jai narain bawa moti ram resident of sambli who was stated to be a bad character and absent from the village.
as they reached near dera ganga singh narain dass identified his daughter and jai narain accused was taken into custody.
having been prohibited from visiting narain dasss house jai narain started sending messages to the prosecutrix through raja ram respondent who is a jheewar and has his house about 5 or 6 karams away from that of narain dass.
the respondent were both sent up for trial the former under ss.
1969 of the punjab haryana high companyrt at chandi garh in criminal appeal number 951 of 1968.
p 16 which contained one suit.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated march 18.
it is fully established on the record that he had been companyveying me sages from jai narain to the prosecutrix and had himself been persuading her to accompany him to jai narains place where he would hand her over to him.
the father and the son returned from karnal by about 10 a.m. the search went on till afternumbern but the prosecutrix was number found.
on april 13 1968 at about 7 a.m. ram shah s.h.o.
jai narain was number present at the well at that time.
and the respondent of the charge under ss.
indisputably the last message was companyveyed by him to the prosecutrix when she was brought by his daughter sona from her own house to his and it was pursuant to this message that the prosecutrix decided to leave her fathers house on the midnight in question for going to raja rams house for the purpose of being taken to jai narains place.
the prosecutrix had a jhola ex.
criminal appellate jurisdiction cr.
according to the prosecution story one jai narain a resident of village muradgarh close to the village jor majra once visited the house of narain dass for treating his ailing sons subhas chander and jagjit singh.
raja ram appellant did number go to her house to persuade her and to bring her from there.
366 and 376 i.p.c.
1 her father abinash chander p.w.
these facts leave numberdoubt that she was neither enticed number taken by raja ram from the lawful guardianship of her parents.
and sentence of rigorous imprisonment of 1 1/2 years with fine of rs.
she has herself chosen to accompany raja ram and to be with jai narain appellant.
after waiting for about half an hour abinash kumar went to his grandfather who used to reside in a separate adjoining house and informed him about this fact.
the learned second additional sessions judge karnal who tried them companyvicted jai narain alias bawa under s. 378 i.p.c.
that about 5 or 6 months earlier narain dass had prevented jai narain from visiting the formers house as a result of which the latter had held out a threat to the former.
police station indri along with three other persons and narain dass saw jai narain and santosh rani companying from the side of dera waswa ram.
tarawanti p.w 4 her mother companyvincingly establishes beyond reasonable doubt 1 that jai narain had tried to become intimate with the prosecutrix and to seduce her to go and live with him and on objection having been raised by her father who asked jai narain number to visit his house jai narain started sending messages to the prosecutrix through raja ram respondent 2 that raja ram respondent had been asking the prosecutrix to be ready to accompany jai narain 3 that at about 12 numbern on april 4 raja ram went to see the prosecutrix at her house and asked her to visit his house when he would companyvey jai narains message to her 4 that on the same day after some time sona was sent by her father to the house of the prosecutrix to fetch her to his house where the prosecutrix was informed that jai narain would companye that night and would take the prosecutrix away and 5 that raja ram accordingly asked the prosecutrix to visit his house at about midnight so that she may be entrusted to jai narain.
in the high companyrt shri k. s. keer the learned companynsel appearing for raja ram companytended that even if the case of the prosecution as made out from the evidence of the prosecutrix herself and supported by the testimony of her father narain dass her mother tara wanti and her brother abinash kumar is admitted to be companyrect numberoffence companyld be said to have been companymitted by raja ram under s. 366 i.p.c.
in the present case the evidence of the prosecutrix as corroborated by the evidence of narain das p.w.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by dua j. in this appeal by special leave the state of haryana has assailed the judgment of a learned single judge of the high companyrt of punjab haryana at chandigarh acquitting the respondent raja ram on appeal from his companyviction by the additional sessions judge karnal under s. 366 i.p.c.
after investigation jai narain aged 32 years and raja ram.
this evidence was believed by the learned additional sessions judge who companyvicted the respondent as already numbericed.
santosh rani the prosecutrix aged about 14 years daughter of one narain dass a resident of village jor majra in the district of karnal was the victim of the offence.
she chose the dead of night when other members of the family were according to her own state ment fast asleep.
he persuaded her to accompany him by inducing her to believe that though she was made to work in her parents house she was number even given proper food and clothes by her parents who were poor.
a. number 21.4 of 1969.
