The prosecution successfully proved the charges against the accused, and the revision petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. A. Tiwari, learned Amicus Curiae. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, representing the State.

2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to the present case is that on 19.05.2009, the victim/daughter of the informant Pradip Das who is a student of Class-IX did not return home after attending school examination, at about 2.30 P.M. Her father/informant made searches of her in the school premises and came to know that the accused petitioner Bhairab Das has abducted the victim girl in a black Indica vehicle and fled away. Immediately after the occurrence, father of the victim lodged an FIR against the petitioner, which was registered as Morigaon P.S. Case No.89/2009 under Sections 366-A IPC.

3. During the course of investigation, victim girl was recovered and her statement was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC. Medical examination of the victim was done. The accused Bhairab Das surrendered before the court and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused petitioner under Sections 366-A/376 IPC.

4. The accused faced the trial and denied the charges framed against him under Sections 366(A)/376 IPC.

5. Trial was conducted and after recording the statement of all witnesses and considering the case in totality, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Morigaon in Sessions Case No.113/2009 (G.R. No.500/2009) vide order dated 15.11.2011 convicted the accused petitioner under Section 366/376 IPC. He is sentenced to R/I for 4(four) years under Section 366 IPC along with a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default S/I for 2(tow) months. He is also sentenced to R/I for 5(five) years under Section 376 IPC and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default S/I for 2(two) months.

6. On the appeal so preferred, the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon, in Criminal Appeal No.35/2011 upheld the judgment and sentenced passed by the learned trial court vide its order dated 26.04.2012.

7. Being aggrieved by the judgments and orders of both the trial court as well as the appellate court, the present revision is preferred on the various grounds, inter alia that the courts below has misread the provision of law and the evidence on record and thereby committed materials irregularity in passing the impugned judgments and orders; that he courts below have come to an erroneous finding in convicting the petitioner guilty under Sections 366/376 IPC; that the learned courts below failed to apply its judicious mind and based its reliance on the statement of PW1, whose statement was not even supported by any independent witness or eye witness; that the prosecution is full of contradiction which goes to the root of the case, making the version unreliable and as such the conviction and sentence are perverse to the materials on record and liable to be quashed and set aside, etc. etc. and prays for quashing and setting aside the impugned sentence and conviction and set the petitioner at liberty, after going through the materials on record.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner primarily raised following contentions during argument -

(i) That the victim was major and the learned court had wrongly arrived at a finding that the victim was minor ;

(ii) The age of the girl was not proved by prosecution properly, and the guardian/parents of the victim, also could not proved the date of birth of their daughter/victim girl;

(iii) According to the M.O., the age of the victim is 15 to 16 years and her age can be varied by adding two years on either side;

(iv) The FIR which is on record is the second FIR and the earlier FIR that was filed is not proved. Hence, the prosecution case is doubtful;

(v) The uncorroborated testimony of the victim, even not supported by the medical officer, is not safe to rely in order to sustain conviction.

(vi) Referring to the conduct of the victim, it has been stated that she voluntarily accompanied the accused per