Telangana High Court
Wajeed Khan, vs State Of A.P., Rep By Pp., on 26 July, 2022
Bench: K.Surender
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.316 OF 2009
JUDGMENT:
1. The appellant/accused is convicted for the offence under
Section 366-A IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to
pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for one month, vide
judgment in S.C.No.452 of 2008, dated 20.03.2009 passed by the II
Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Aggrieved by
the same, the present appeal is filed.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.04.2006 a complaint
was filed by P.W.1 stating that his daughter who is aged 17 years
and studying intermediate left the house without informing elders
and she did not return home. The police registered missing case
and started investigation. On 19.05.2006, both P.W.3 (victim girl)
and the appellant went to the police station and produced marriage
certificate along with their marriage photograph. On comparing the
marriage certificate it was revealed that the marriage was
solemnised in Hyderabad on 26.04.2006 in the office of Secretary
and Director of A.P.Cosmopolitan Marriage Bureau. On further
investigation it was found that as per school record the date of birth
of P.W.3 was 02.10.1988. However, zero was erased in the birth
certificate and the date of birth was shown as 02.01.1988 to get
married on 26.04.2006. For the reason of forgery and manipulating
the birth certificate, giving false statement at the time of marriage
that the victim girl attained majority, the marriage was performed,
the case was investigated. Since the victim girl, P.W.3 was less than
18 years as on the date of marriage, the police filed charge sheet
against the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 366-A,
471, 109 and 376 of IPC. Charges were framed accordingly and
after conclusion of trial, Court found that the appellant was guilty
for the offence under Section 366-A of IPC and acquitted the
appellant are for the offences under Sections 471, 109 and 376 of
IPC.
3. P.W.1, who is the father of the victim girl P.W.3, stated that
P.W.3 was missing on 26.04.2006 and her age was around 17
years. The complaint was registered as 'missing girl', which
complaint is Ex.P1. The police brought his daughter to his house
on 19.05.2006 and handed her over to him. P.W.2 is the mother,
who stated the same as P.W.1.
4. P.W.3 the victim girl stated that her date of birth is 2.10.1998.
During the year 2006, while she was studying II year Intermediate
in Arts and Science College, Shivam Road, she got acquaintance
with the appellant and they used to go for movies and parks and
they were in love. On 20.04.2006, the appellant went to Karimnagar
and brought her to Hyderabad and she took her date of birth
certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, which
is Ex.P2. However, the appellant fabricated the said certificate by
altering date of birth to 2.1.1998. After marriage, both of them
stayed together from 28.04.2006 till 19.05.2006 in a rented house
in Kushaiguda and lived as husband and wife. However,
Kushaiguda police traced them and she was sent to her parents
house.
5. The learned Sessions Judge had found the appellant not
guilty for the offence of rape and also using any fabricated
document and acquitted the appellant for the said offences of rape
and fabrication of documents. The State has not preferred any
appeal against the said acquittal.
6. An offence under Section 366-A of IPC is attracted when any
person by whatsoever means induces a girl below 18 years to go
from any place or to do any act, with intention that such girl may
be or is likely to be forced or seduced into intercourse with another
person.
7. In the present case, according to P.W.3, she accompanied
appellant to Hyderabad and got married. It is not the case of the
prosecution that there was any inducement on the part of the
appellant to force her to have illicit intercourse either with him or
with any other person. In the said circumstances, when there is no
evidence of forcing or seducing or inducing P.W.3 into illicit
intercourse with another person, the offence under Section 366-A of
IPC is not attracted.
8. An offence under Section 366-A of IPC was introduced with an
intention to punish the export and import of girls for prostitution
especially procuring minor girls from one part of India to another.
9. The main purpose and object of Section 366-A of IPC is to
punish such procurers, who procure such girls by force or seduce
them into illicit intercourse with another person. The said offence
would be complete only when deliberate inducement of a minor girl
is established and thereby forcing her into having sexual
intercourse with another person.
10. The said ingredients of Section 366-A of IPC are not made out
in the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the said
circumstances when none of the ingredients under Section 366-A
of IPC are proved by the prosecution, the appeal has to be allowed.
11. In the result, the judgment of trial Court in S.C.No.482 of
2008 dated 20.03.2009 is set aside and the accused is acquitted.
Since the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds stand cancelled.
11. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is allowed. As a sequel thereto,
miscellaneous petitions, if, pending, shall stands closed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 26.07.2022
Note: LR copy to be marked
B/o.kvs
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.316 of 2009
Date: 26.07.2022.
kvs
