After companypletion of investigation charge sheet was filed and since accused persons pleaded innocence they were put on trial.
Dr. Mangi Lal Bohra PW 1 has proved the injuries caused to Muse Khan on the date of incident by the accused persons while abducting the prosecutrix.
The fact that Muse Khan was assaulted by the accused, stands companyroborated by the evidence of Doctor who is companypletely independent witness.
PW 2 is Muse Khan who is brother of prosecutrix and he has deposed that he was asleep when he was assaulted.
The prosecution version relied primarily on the evidence of Prosecutrix PW 5 .
PW 4 Janu Khan , was also present when the abduction took place.
Ishaqu PW 3 at whose place, the accused is alleged to have kept the prosecutrix.
The prosecution has proved the state of prosecutrix at the place of Ishaqu PW 3 .
Another man also rode and Neku Khan, Same Khan and Bakhsu Khan walked on feet and then took her to the Dadi of the accused, stripped her clothes and dressed her with new clothes and ornaments and then Neku Khan did bed work like husband wife, she stayed there for two nights and for two nights Neku Khan did bed work with her, thereafter the police arrived there with her father, the accused persons ran away, the police brought her to Mandli Police Station.
The testimony of Muse Khan that he was assaulted and abduction of prosecutrix is thus companyroborated by testimony of Janu Khan.
They referred to the evidence of PWs 2,4 5 and held the appellant guilty and directed companyviction and imposed sentence as aforenoted.
He saw the accused assaulting Muse Khan and abducting the prosecutrix.
The trial companyrt and the High companyrt did number find any substance in the plea.
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the trial companyrt and the High Court lost sight of the fact that the DWs 1 2 categorically stated about the marriage of the victim with appellant No.
He is the person who has lodged the report of the incident to the police.
Two witnesses were examined by the appellant to show that the victim was married to appellant number 1 and therefore there was numberrape as companytended and numberabduction.
Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows Between the intervening night 13.9.1984 and 14.9.1984 Muse Khan PW 2 , Janu Khan PW 4 , Prosecutrix PW 5 , wife Reshma, Indro PW 6 wife of Bakhsu Khan, Makhni PW 7 wife of Sachchu Khan were sleeping at the house of Bakhsu Khan in village Raivada, accused persons Neku Khan, Bakhsu Khan, Barkat Khan, Ali Sher and Same Khan arrived on a Nisan vehicle, the accused Barkat was having the iron rod and the other persons were having lathis, they beat Muse Khan PW 2 and placed Prosecutrix daughter of Bakhsu in Nisan vehicle forcefully and went away, the accused Same Khan shut her mouth with hand and then got down at Gida village with Prosecutrix, for some time walked on foot, after a while the accused Same Khan came with a camel and made Prosecutrix ride the camel.
He saw the accused assaulting his brother and then saw them taking away his sister.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur upholding the companyviction of appellant No.1 Neku Khan for offence punishable under Sections 376, 147, 323/149, 342, 458 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC The other appellants were companyvicted for offence punishable under Section 147, 323/149, 342, 458 and 366 IPC.
