JUDGMENT

Hansaria, J. These appeals are by the State, who has felt aggrieved at the acquittal of the two respondents by the High Court on appeals being preferred by them against their convictions, which were under sections 366, 366A and 376 I.P.C. insofar as respondent No. 1 is concerned and u/s 376 as regard respondent No.2. Two other accused had also been booked for trial under section 366 but they were acquitted.

2. The short facts which need be noted for the disposal of the appeals are that according to the prosecution, P.W. 3 Bhagyamma had been kidnapped by respondent No.1 with the intent that she would be forced or seduced to have intercourse, where after she came to be raped by both the respondents. The High Court, after perusal of the materials on record, took the view that elopement of Bhagyamma may not be ruled out. After hearing Shri Raghuvir for the appellant-State, we have not felt inclined to take a view different from that of the High Court on this aspect Shri Raghuvirs main submission, however, is that acquittal of respondent No., 1 under section 366 was not warranted, even if, age of Bhagyamma be taken to be above 16. The relevant of this age is that consent becomes