JUDGMENT :

ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.

1. Appellant, Sudama Sai has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 366A of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5000/- in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months, additionally, under Section 376(C) IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5000/- in default thereof to undergo R.I. for six months, additionally, under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5000/- in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months, with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently by the judgment of conviction dated 03.12.2015 order of sentence dated 09.12.2015 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge-cum Special Judge, POCSO Kaimur at Bhabhua in connection with Trial No. 2/2014 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No. 183/2013.

2. Kabutari Devi (PW-1) filed written report on 08.12.2013 disclosing therein that at an earlier occasion there was religious congregation and in order to facilitate the same, they have invited Sudama Sai. During course thereof, he had frequent visit continued even after congregation. During course thereof, Sudama Rai developed good repo with all the family members and, under garb of aforesaid eventuality he took away her daughter (name withheld, PW-10) aged about 16 years to his Ashram. She along with other met repeatedly by going there and requested the Sudama Sai to let her daughter free but, he did pay heed to it. Her daughter had also shown inclination to come therefrom but was not allowed by the Sudama Rai. Then, thereafter she approached Nari Adalat and, all the members thereof including she herself came at the Aasharam apprehended the Sadhu, got her daughter rescued, brought to the local police station where they have been produced along with submission of the written information.

3. After registration of Chainpur P.S. Case No. 183/2013 investigation commenced and concluded by way of submission of charge sheet followed with trial meeting with the ultimate result, subject matter of instant appeal.

4. Defence case as is evident from made of cross-examination as well as statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial. However, nothing has been adduced in defence.

5. In order to substantiate its case prosecution has examined altogether ten PWs. who are PW-1 Kabutary Devi, PW-2 Kalawati Devi, PW-3 Rina Kuwer, PW-4 Anita Devi, PW-5 Pushpa Devi, PW-6 Gira Devi, PW-7 Maya Devi, PW-8 Dr. Ambar, PW-9 Manoj Kumar No. 1, PW-10 Victim. Side-by-side has also exhibited, Ext.1 Signature of informant over written report, Ext.2 Medical examination report, Ext.3 Pregnancy Test Report, Ext.4 Consent letter given by victim, Ext.5 Report submitted by Krishna Mohan Singh after examination of veginal swab, Ext.6 Ultra Sound and Ext.7 Formal FIR. As stated above, nothing has been adduced at the end of the defence.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned APP. Gone through the record.

7. From perusal of the record, it is evident that prosecution has adduced three kinds of evidence. The first one is that of PW-1 to PW-4, informant and her family members, second set of evidence that of PW-5, PW-6, PW-7 and PW-8 members of the Mahila Gang who got the victim rescued from the Aashram also apprehended the appellant and produced before the police. PW-9 is the I.O. and PW-10 is the victim herself.

8. From the evidence of PW-1 to PW-4, it is evident that virtually they have acknowledged the appellant as their Guru and they reciprocated in same manner identifying themselves as dexible. Under the aforesaid relationship, the appellant had free access and taking benefit thereof, came in contact with the victim who, after meeting at different occasion got influenced slipped and gone to Math in company of appellant. She remained there even during intermediary