( 1 ) THE six appellants [saroj, Abhimanya, Abani, Sagar, Shyam @ Shyamal and Dinesh (hereafter A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5 and A-6 respectively)] were arraigned in Sessions Trial No. VII (March) of 2001 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia to answer the following charges :

"first - That you, on or about the 2. 1. 97 at about 10-45 p. m. at ratanpur, P. S. Karimpur, District Nadia she may be forced to illicit intercourse and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, and within my cognizance. Secondly-That you, on or about the 2. 1. 97 at about 10-45 p. m. at ratanpur, P. S. Karimpur, District Nadia in furtherance of the common intention of you all, voluntarily caused hurt to Mahadev Mondal and sudhamoy Mondal and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and within my cognizance. "

( 2 ) THE trial originated from a written complaint dated 3. 1. 1997 lodged by Bhupendra Nath Mondal P. W. 1 [scribed by Madan Mohan Mondal (P. W. 6)] before the Officer-in-Charge, Karimpur Police Station, District Nadia which was treated as the First Information Report (Ext. 1/1 ). It appears from the endorsement made thereon that it was received by the concerned Police officer at 3. 45 A. M. pursuant whereto Karimpur Police Station Case no. 2/97 dated 3. 1. 97 under Sections 363/366/323/34 of the IPC was started. It was alleged therein that on 2. 1. 1997 at about 10. 45 P. M. , A-l to A-6 along with 5/6 unknown persons had forcibly taken away his daughter Jagati mondal (P. W. 8), aged about 16 years, from his house with ill motive. The wife of P. W. 1, Sudhamoyee Mondal (P. W. 5) and their son, Mahadeb Mondal (P. W. 7) tried to resist them when A-l struck P. W. 5 on her head and P. W. 7 on his forehead. Despite thorough search conducted soon thereafter, P. W. 8 could not be traced out.

( 3 ) ALTHOUGH the complaint was lodged in the early hours of 3. 1. 1997, it appears from perusal of the records that the same was transmitted to the court of the concerned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate only on 10. 1. 1997. In the meantime, A-l and P. W. 8 were recovered from Sahebnagar, on 9. 1. 1997. One version (that of P. W. 3, the Investigating Officer) is that recovery was made from the house of one Sukhen Mondal of Sahebnagar, whereas another version (that of P. Ws. 8 and 5) is that it was from the house of A-6, also of Sahebnagar. A-l was immediately arrested and P. W. 8 was sent to a Rescue Home. On 10. 1. 1997, the P. W. 3 recorded the statement of P. W. 8 under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter the Cr. P. C ). On the same day, P. W. 8's statement was recorded by a Magistrate under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C (Ext. A) on the prayer of the p. W. 3. It was her version (as found from Ext. A) that she had a love affair with A-1 and had eloped with him. It was her further version that her parents were not agreeable to her marriage with A-1 and had fixed her marriage with someone else to be solemnized on 2nd of Magh and for this purpose the parents had paid Rs. 5,100/- to the would be groom's family, and that consequently having voluntarily left her paternal home, she had married a-I. On the basis of another prayer made by the P. W. 3, an ossification test of P. W. 8 was conducted.

( 4 ) A-1 to A-6 having pleaded not guilty to the charges, they faced trial. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents in support of its case. The defence did not adduce any evidence. From the trend of cross-examination and examination of the accused under section 313 of the Cr. P. C. , it appears that voluntary leaving of her parental house by the P. W. 8, an adult, as a result of her love affair with A-1, and a-1 to A-6s' non-involvement in the entire episode was the stand of the defence. Upon consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Judge by her judgment dated 28. 5. 2002