1990 INSC 0366
                                             Faiyas Ahmed and Others

                                                           Vs

                                                    State of Bihar

                                        Criminal Appeal No. 440 of 1978

                                        (P. B. Sawant, K. Ramaswamy JJ)

                                                      10.08.1990

                                                        ORDER

1. The only point which was urged in support of this appeal was that since there is no evidence on
record of show that the woman - Maya Devi was abducted to compel her either to marry against her
wish or to submit to sexual intercourse against her wish, the conviction of the accused under Section
366 of the Indian Penal Code was not warranted by law.

2. We, however, find that there is sufficient evidence on record to show that Maya Devi was
abducted from her house when accused 1 and 2 had taken her against her wish and under threat up
to Patna Railway Station and accused 3 and 4 had thereafter carried her similarly under threat from
Patna Railway Station to village Ajaipur in Bihar Sharif. She was also confined in a house at
Ajaipur village till she was recovered by the police after some hours. That will squarely bring the
accused within the clutches of Sections 365 and 368 of IPC. The offences under these two sections
are lesser offences compared to offence under Section 366 and, therefore, on the evidence before the
court, they are liable to be convicted for the said offences.

3. The trial court had sentenced the accused 1 to 3 to four years rigorous imprisonment and accused
4 to four years simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 366 read with Section 34. The
High Court had reduced the sentences of all the accused to two years rigorous imprisonment and
simple imprisonment respectively for accused 1 to 3 and 4.

4. For the reasons stated earlier, we find that the accused were not liable to be convicted for the
offence under Section 366 IPC but of a lesser offence under Sections 365 and 368 IPC. We are also
informed that accused 1 has undergone rigorous imprisonment for nine months and accused 2 and 3
have undergone rigorous imprisonment for two months and one and a half months respectively.
Accused 4 has died during the pendency of this appeal.

5. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances we modify the sentences of the accused
as follows :

                  (a) Accused 1 is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for the period which he has
                  already undergone and is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2000 and in default to
                  undergo imprisonment for two months.

                  (b) Accused 2 and 3 are similarly sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period
                  already undergone and to pay each a fine of Rs. 5000 and in default to undergo
                  imprisonment for five months.
6. The accused-appellants are given three months' time to deposit the fine in the court of 5th
Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in G.R. Case No. 764/70 (Trial No. 420/71). The fine, if
recovered, will be paid to the father of the lady - Maya Devi.

7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

</html