Gulam Hassan & Ors. v. State of U.P

#2. This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.3.1984 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, in Session Trial No. 171 of 1982 (State Vs. Gulam Hasan and another) arising out of Crime No. 226 of 1981 under Sections 366, 376 IPC, Police Station Kuraoli, District Mainpuri, by which the appellants were acquitted under Section 376 IPC and convicted under Section 366 IPC and were released on probation for a period of two years to keep peace and good behaviour.

#3. During the pendency of appeal, the appellant no.2 Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan died and the appeal for him was abated by order dated 14.11.2018. Appellant no.1 Gulam Hassan is still surviving.

#4. Prosecution case in brief is that on 13.5.1981 at about 11.30 a.m. Km. Afsana was abducted by the appellants to force her for illicit intercourse and thereafter she was subjected to rape.

#5. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed under Sections 366, 376 IPC by the Investigating Officer.

#6. After taking cognizance of the offence and compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C., the case was committed for trial.

#7. Learned trial court framed the charges against the appellants under Sections 366, 376 IPC, which was read over to them and explained. They denied the charges and claimed for trial.

#8. The prosecution examined PW-1 Km. Afsana (victim), PW-2 Shabbar Khan, PW-3 Manjoor Ahmad and PW-4 Dr. Smt. S.B. Agarwal.

#9. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they pleaded guilty and admitted to have committed the crime. The appellants did not adduce any evidence in defence.

#10. After hearing the prosecution as well as the defence, learned trial court passed the judgment and order dated 30.3.1984 holding the appellants guilty under Section 366 IPC and acquitting them under Section 376 IPC.

#11. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that in this case learned trial court has held guilty the appellants for offence under Section 366 IPC and acquitted them under Section 376 IPC on the same evidence. There is no any cogent evidence on record to establish the involvement of the appellant Gulam Hasan in enticing the victim. The FIR was lodged after delay. At the time of alleged incident, the victim was 14 years of age and the deceased appellant Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan was teacher and under his influence the victim was abducted from his house and took her to Agra and then to Madras and then to Kanpur, likewise he kept her for a period of three months. The role of present appellant Gulam Hasan was only to make help of Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan in taking the girl from Kuraoli to Agra and from thereto Madras. There is no any other material on record to show the involvement of present appellant Gulam Hasan in enticing away the victim, therefore, he is entitled for acquittal.

#12. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that there is sufficient material on record to show that the present appellant Gulam Hasan also helped the co-appellant Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan in enticing away the victim, therefore, learned trial court has committed no error in holding his conviction with the co-appellant. The learned trial court has shown leniency in awarding the sentence to the appellant, therefore, there appears no any error of fact or law in holding guilty the present appellant, but this appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

#13. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the judgment and order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the victim was enticed away by co-appellant Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan. The role of present appellant Gulam Hasan was to assist Hafiz @ Abdul Hamid Khan in taking away the victim to Agra from Kuraoli and from thereto Madras. The learned trial court has recorded the finding in this regard on the basis of evidence on record, therefore, there is no any error of fact or law in recording the finding as aforesaid. There appears no any ground for acquittal of the appellant Gulam Hasan of the charges under Section 366 IPC.

#14. So far as the sentence is concerned, the learned trial court has shown leniency and released the appellant Gulam Hasan on probation extending the benefit of Section 4 of U.P. First Offenders Probation Act and released him on personal bond for Rs.2,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount for a period of two years to keep peace and good behaviour. There appears no any ground to make interference in the judgment and order dated 30.3.1984 passed by the learned trial court but this appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

#15. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is dismissed. However, the judgment was passed in the year 1984 and till now 41 years have elapsed and the appellant Gulam Hasan has also become old, therefore, he does not need to execute fresh personal bond or sureties.

#16. Copy of this judgment along-with original trial court record be transmitted to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. A compliance report be sent to this Court within two months. Office is directed to keep the compliance report on record. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Anil ANIL KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad