SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.

1. The present leave to appeal has been preferred by the State under Section 378(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure against the impugned judgment dated 17.01.2015 whereby the accused persons were acquitted for the offences under Sections 363 / 366/376/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the prosecution are as under:

“The victim P aged about 15 years left her house for school at about 7 am, on 31.08.2010.However, she did not return back till late evening. Her family made efforts to search for her, but when there was no clue about the victim, the matter was reported to the police vide DD no. 57-B i.e Ex.PW-22/A, which was assigned to SI Mohd. Imtiaz for inquiry. SI Mohd. Imtiaz made efforts to contact complainant Satbir, but he was not found available. At about2.35 am, on 1.09.2010, complainant Satbir went to the police station himself and made complaint about missing of victim P. he expressed his suspicion on accused Ramesh for having enticed and kidnapped his daughter and prayed that necessary action be taken against him. SI Mohd. Imtiaz got registered a case u/s 363 IPC on the basis of the complaint made by Sh