1. Heard Mr. K.M. Haloi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, for the Respondent-State.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 29.5.2008 rendered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, (FTC) Darrang, Mangaldai in Sessions Case No. 208 (DM)/ 06 U/S 366 IPC convicting the accused appellant and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years with fine of Rs.7,000/- in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 28.11.2005 at 9 AM daughter of the informant, Ms Enowara Begum, aged about 12 years, was found missing while she was going to school. Thereafter on the same day, the mother of the victim girl lodged an FIR before the Mangaldoi Police Station stating inter-alia that she could learn from the pedestrian that the accused/appellant Bafaru Seikh along with his one friend had kidnapped her daughter. On the basis of the FIR, Mangaldoi Police has registered a case being Mangaldoi Police Station Case No. 369/05 U/S 366(A)/34 IPC.

4. In course of investigation, the police rescued the victim girl along with the accused appellant and said appellant had been sent to jail hajot. The police also submitted charge-sheet against the appellant U/S 366(A)/376 IPC.

5. After receipt of the Charge-sheet, the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi transferred the case to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Darrang, Mangaldoi, who framed formal charge against the accused U/S 366 IPC. The charge was read over and explained to the accused/appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. During trial the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses including the Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer of the case. The prosecution witnesses were cross-examined by the defence and defence examined one witness. The defence denied to adduce any evidence in its support. On conclusion of trial the accused appellants convicted as aforesaid. Hence the appeal before this Court.

7. PW 1, victim girl deposed that in the year 2005 when she was reading in Class-VIII, she was 13 years old. On the day occurrence when she was going to school two boy came by an autorickshaw and forcefully taken her in an auto and went to the house of the aunt of the present appellant. Thereafter they took her to Tongla and kept there for 6/7 days, where the accused appellant rapped her. She was rescued there by police. She was medically examined and her statement U/S 164 CrPC was also recorded. In her cross this victim girl stated that accused appellant and his friend forcefully took her in the auto and taken her to accused appellant’s aunt’s house. Though she cried but there was none to help her. It is also stated that the accused appellant took her on foot after the autorickshaw was kept by the side of the road.

8. The parents of the victim Asma Begum/PW 2 (mother) and Md. Abed Ali PW/3 (father) both of them have stated that on the day of occurrence their daughter /PW 1 was aged about 14 years did not return from school for which the Ejahar was filed vide Ext.2 and their daughter was recovered after 15 days. The PW 1 reported to PW 3 that she was forcefully taken by the accused appellant from the road but she stated nothing to PW 2. It is stated by PW3 that accused used to work under him as an Assistant mason.

9. Other witnesses, Rohima Begum/PW 4, Samsul Hoque PW5 do not know anything about the occurrence and PW 4 has simply stated that PW1 did not return from school and after 12/13 days police recovered her. PW7 and PW8 are the Investigating Officers and they have stated all about receipt of FIR and filing of Charge-sheet. The victim girl was examined by PW9 Doctor D. Nath after her recovery and according to him the girl was aged about 14 years below 16 years and there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. Ext. 4 is the medical repor