Section 365B & 496A Convicted of abducting, abducting or forcibly marrying, the accused is accused of having abducted the accused's daughter in marriage with a co-accused, the trial said. Section 496A, amended and sentenced the charge under PPC. The accused was sentenced to 2 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 5,000, the kidnapper left his parents' house with his free consent and according to his statement he found out shortly afterwards that he was being taken to another city. But during that time he never resisted or informed anyone about the abduction of the toll plaza or the police, there was no evidence on record that the kidnapper had any marriage contract. Forced to marry him, she alleged that she only proposed to marry him whom he had refused, and any power factor against her. Was not utilized. The kidnappers made dishonest reforms to suit the prosecution's story as they appeared in the witness box. It was on record that the accused was supposed to be the victim of minor aggravation or he had intercourse with her when the kidnapper returned or the next day the abductor and the complainant would not have to give a statement to the police. There is no plausible explanation in the record, she remained silent for 6 days and remained in custody of her father and the statements before her investigating officer and magistrate were nothing but thought and because of the debate, the complainant had left the witnesses and He made several dishonest reforms to his statement while appearing in the trial court. It was accurately observed that the complainant and the victim were the victims
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
