Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. In the cross examination, PW11 deposed that he had made enquiries from Raju between 02.2.2012 and 07.2.2012 and Raju had told him that Rahul has taken away his daughter. He admitted that his elder daughter Pinky was also studying in the same school, in which the prosecutrix was studying. He deposed that Pinky was 17 years old and had left the house at 6.30 a.m. on the day on which the prosecutrix disappeared and the prosecutrix had left house at 7 a.m. He did not know Rahul prior to the date of incident. He denied the suggestion that his daughter was more than 17 years of age. He did not know the number from which the prosecutrix had made a call to him from Sonepat. He had gone to the house of one lady Manju in Sonepat, from whose mobile the prosecutrix had called him as he had asked that lady to keep his daughter with her. He did not remember the exact address of the house of Manju. He did not notice whether the police had done any writing work in the house of Manju at Sonepat. They left the house of Manju at 7.30 p.m. and reached Delhi at 11.30 A.M. They had stayed in the house of Manju for one hour.

11. In the cross examination, she deposed that she knew accused Rahul for the last two years and her sister Pinki also knew him. She used to accompany her elder sister Pinki while going to and returning from the school. She did not inform her parents or her sister about going with the accused. Accused had met her at about 6.30 am near a wall and she was in school uniform at that time. Accused caught hold of her hand and asked her to go alongwith him to his village in the house of his Mausi. She came under the influence of the accused. She raised alarm but nobody was there and the accused threatened her that he would kill her father. She did not remember whether other school going children did notice this fact. She did not know to which bus stand did they reach first of all. However, From there, accused took her to old Delhi Railway Station. She did not notice any Police Officials at the Railway Station. She did not raise any alarm at the Railway Station. From Railway Station, they left for Hardoi at 4.30 pm. She did not tell any person between 6.30 am to 4.30 pm when accused was taking her away without her consent. The train in which they were travelling reached Hardoi at 1.30 am in the night. No police official of Railway Police were present at the platform at village Hardoi at that time. Accused took her to an isolated land from the Railway Station and they stayed there till 4.30 am when the accused took her to the house of his Mausi by Tonga. She did not raise any alarm on the way to his Mausi's house. She was knowing the mobile number of her father but she did not make any call to her father as no phone was provided to her. The house of the mausi of the accused and that of Ram Kumar was the same. The mausa of the accused and his four children were also residing in that house. The house did not consist of any room but it was a temporary terpolin covered area. The plot size was 25 sq. yards. Mausa of the accused and his elder son used to sleep outside the house and the rest of the family members used to sleep inside the room. She further deposed that the lady who met her at the Sonepat Bus Stand was Manju and she took her to the house of her sister-in-law where she remained till her father arrived. She did not see any police official in Sonepat bus stand. She also did not tell anything to her father but police officials made inquiries from her. She also deposed that in Sonepat, in one room, accused Raj Kumar, Ram Kumar and Rahul were residing. She stayed in that room for about one and a half months. She stated that accused Raj Kumar and Ram Kumar used to reside in Sonepat but accused Ram Kumar was also present in Hardoi when she was staying there alongwith accused Rahul.

12. PW-21 is Ms. Manju who had met the prosecutrix at Sonepat Bus Stand. She did not remember the month in which the incident took place. However, it happened before 8 to 9 months before the date she was examined in the Court. She remembered that it was 2nd day of the month. She deposed that during that time she was residing at Surya Petrol Pump Wali Gali No.6, Sonepat, Haryana alongwith her family and that day at about 3 pm or 4 pm when she was returning from the market and was passing in front of the Sonepat Bus Stand, she found a girl standing there, who was weeping. She went to that girl and asked her why she was weeping. The girl did not tell her why she was weeping. She gave her a glass of water which she took. The girl requested her to lend her mobile phone as she wanted to call her paents. She gave the same to the girl from which she called her parents and they requested to keep the girl with her till they reached Sonepat. Accordingly, she took the girl to her residence. The girl disclosed her name as 'R'. At about 7 pm, the parents of the girl 'R' came to her residence and took her away. In the cross examination, she deposed that parents of 'R' accompanied by three to four police persons. She had seen 'R' for the first time on that date and did not know her before that date. She denied the suggestion that her husband Sagar and accused Raj Kumar were employed at the same place. She did not know accused Raj Kumar, who was present in the court. She did not know whether police officials had arrested any person on that date in Sonepat. She did not know what police did after leaving her residence. She further stated that she had taken Ruby to the house of her sister-in-law (Bhabhi) and was taken by her parents only. She did not make any call to accused Raj Kumar from her mobile phone. Ruby did not tell her anything about her ordeal. She admitted that police did not meet her and Ruby at Sonepat Bus Stand.

13. According to PW-19 ASI Hari Singh, the complainant came to the Police Station on 02.05.2012 and told him that he has received a telephonic call from his daughter 'R' that she is present at Bus Terminal in Sonepat. He alongwith SI Jitender, Constable Sumit and the complainant reached bus terminal, Sonepat. The complainant identified a girl standing at the gate of the bus terminal to be his daughter 'R'. On inquiries 'R' told that she was taken away by Rahul and brought to Sonepat where they had been residing in the house of Rahul's maternal uncle in Surya Petrol Pump wali gali, Rame Nagar. They went to that house but it was found locked, when they were returning from that house, the girl pointed towards a boy in the gali saying that he is Rahul. They apprehended Rahul and then brought them to Delhi. In the cross examination, he deposed that Manju did not meet them on that day and from Sonepat Bus terminal, they had gone to only one place i.e. house of Pappu and no other place.