The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of evidence led to the quashing of the conviction.

JUDGMENT :

(Abhay S. Waghwase, J.)

1. Instant appeal takes exception to judgment and order dated 12-01-2006 rendered by learned 3rd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Sessions Trial No.93 of 2005 recording guilt of the appellants for offence under Section 363 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF

2. In trial Court, both above appellants were chargesheeted on the premise that on 24-03-2005 they abducted and kidnapped informant’s daughter and his minor granddaughter with intent to compel informant’s daughter to marry against her will and further force her to indulge in sexual intercourse.

On report of PW1 Peeraji at exh.11, crime was registered for offence under Sections 363, 366, 366A read with 34 of the IPC and tried by 3rd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani vide Sessions Trial No.93 of 2005.

On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, learned trial Judge acquitted both accused from charge under Sections 366 and 366A read with 34 of the IPC, but convicted them for offence under Section 363 read with 34 of the IPC. Hence, instant appeal.

SUBMISSIONS On behalf of appellants :

3. Learned Counsel for the appellants challenged above judgment on the ground that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case and charges beyond reasonable doubt. Leaned Counsel took this Court through the evidence of prosecution witnesses, more particularly, PW1 informant, his daughter PW2 and minor girl PW3 and would submit that they are not consistent and are not supporting each other on material count. That their evidence is full of material omissions, contradictions and they are at variance with each other.

4. Learned Counsel submitted that very informant’s evidence is confusing. She emphasized that for almost more than two months informant has not lodged missing report of his own daughter or grand daughter. That delay of more than two months has occurred in lodging report of which there is no plausible explanation. She pointed out that he informed that his daughter, who was a widow, had left the house with her own daughter to visit her brother’s place. That he claimed that he learnt that she did not reach there and she was searched for, but still no missing report was lodged with Police authorities.

5. She further submitted that PW2 Mainabai, who was said to be a victim, has alleged that she was abducted, but her testimony categorically shows that she herself accompanied the accused. There is no element of force or inducement. That her version is falsified by her own daughter PW3, as according to learned Counsel, PW3, the minor, has admitted that accused and PW2 Mainabai and her daughter PW3 were travelling in different bogies and therefore, there is no question of abduction. She pointed out that there was no attempt to raise alarm or inform anyone about alleged abduction and therefore, she questions the credibility and veracity of evidence of PW2 Mainabai. Learned counsel pointed out that there is no evidence to show that victim was taken or sold as is alleged by her. Learned counsel pointed out that the man to whom she was allegedly sold is not surprisingly apprehended and even no investigation has been carried out in that regard, to which it is pointed out that there is clear admission by very Investigating Officer. For all above reasons, she questions the very charge and case of prosecution.

Taking this court through the evidence of minor PW3, learned Counsel pointed out that her version does not tally with her own mother PW2 in whose company she was for several days. According to learned Counsel, minor’s evidence gives a different complexion to the story of prosecution. That her evidence cannot be readily accepted as there is every possibility of child being tutored by PW1 grandfather, PW2 mother and PW4 Shanker.

6. Learned counsel also criticized evidence of PW4 Shanker, who allegedly informed PW1 informant about seeing PW3 on the Railway Station and further being brought to Police Station. Le