Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.182 OF 1994 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 30.5.1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai, in Sessions Trial No. 524 of 1993/28 of 1994) MD. SULEMAN @ SULO, SON OF RAM CHANDRA @ RAM CHANDRA PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KAPASIA, P.S. BEGUSARAI, DISTT. BEGUSARAI. ------- APPELLANT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------RESPONDENT Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 214 OF 1994 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 30.5.1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai, in Sessions Trial No. 524 of 1993/28 of 1994) 1. SHANTI DEVI, WIFE OF KAILU YADAV 2. MADINA KHATOON, WIFE OF HANIF MIAN BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE KAPASIA, P.S. MUFASSIL, DISTT. BEGUSARAI. ----- APPELLANTS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---------RESPONDENT For the Appellants : Mrs. Indu Kumari Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: Heard. The Appellant of Criminal Appeal 182 of 1994 has been convicted under Section 344 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act and sentenced to three years and five years rigorous imprisonment respectively whereas the Appellant No. 1 of Criminal Appeal 214 of 1994 has been convicted under Section 344 of the Indian Penal Code whereas the Appellant No. 2 of Criminal Appeal 214 of 1994 has been convicted under Section 344 of the Indian Penal Code alone and 2 sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment in Sessions Trial No. 524 of 1993/28 of 1994 by a Judgment dated 30.5.1994 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai. The case of the prosecution was that the Informant’s niece had been kidnapped by unknown persons from the Katihar Bus Stand and one year later she was recovered from the house of the Appellant Shanti Devi on a tip off given by a Rikshaw Puller that he had seen the victim there. During trial the prosecution examined eleven witnesses out of whom PW-6 is the victim herself whereas PW-1 is the Rikshaw Puller and PW-2 is an independent witness who was on the point of recovery of victim from the house of Appellant Shanti Devi. PW-3 has stated about the factum of the disappearance of the victim a year before she was recovered and that on the tip off, the Rikshaw Puller, the victim was recovered from the house of Appellant Shanti Devi in his presence. PW- 4 has corroborated the evidence of PW-3. PW-5 is a tendered witness whereas PW-6 is the victim herself and PW-7 is the Informant and PW-8 is the father of the victim. PW-9 is the Magistrate who recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr. P.C. and PW-10 is the Doctor who examined the victim and PW-11 is the Investigating Officer. On going through the evidence of PW-6, I find that she has fully corroborated that about one year before her recovery, she was taken away by Appellant Shanti Devi on the pretext of buying Bangles for her and she along with Appellant Suleman had forcibly taken her to the house of Shanti Devi where she was forced into prostitution. 3 She also stated that Appellant Shanti Devi used to keep the proceeds with her and one year later she was recovered at the behest of the Police Offiicials who came along with other family members. During cross-examination, her evidence remained unshaken and she appears to be completely trustworthy. The Doctor who was examined, stated that the victim was about 15 years of age and opined that she was habituated of coitus. The Investigating Officer, PW-11 has also stated the manner in which the victim was recovered from the house of Appellant Shanti Devi and the fact that her house was used for prostitution. In view of such cogent evidence, I see no merit in the Appeal, the same is dismissed. However, Appellant Madina Khatoon who has been convicted under Section 344 of the Indian Penal Code is sentenced to a period already under gone. With the modification mentioned above, both the Appeals are dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to take immediate steps for arrest of the Appellants to serve out the remaining sentence. Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 6th April, 2011 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)