The prosecution must prove the specific intent and compulsion required for the offences under Section 366 and Section 452 of the IPC. Thorough investigation and the recording of the victim's statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. are crucial in cases involving such offences.

JUDGMENT :

1. This criminal appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction dated 08.06.2004 and order of sentence dated 11.06.2004 passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, (FTC-VIII), Ranchi in Sessions Trial No.362 of 2003/Trial No. 27 of 2003, whereby and where under, the sole appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 366/34 and Section 452/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years under section 366/34 of IPC. He is further sentence to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two thousand) and in default of payment of fine, he is directed to undergo R.I. for 6 months. The convicted accused appellant is further sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years under section 452/34 IPC and he is also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees one thousand) and in default of payment of fine, he is directed to undergo R.I. for 3 months and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. However, the period of detention undergone by the convicted accused during the investigation, inquiry or trial shall be set off against the substantive sentence awarded to him.

2. The prosecution story arose in the wake of written report of the informant Raghunandan Ram (PW 2) addressed to Officer-In-Charge of Doranda police station, Ranchi. Briefly stated the prosecution story as unfolded in the said written report was that the Informant stated that Sanju Kumari aged 17 years and Soni Kumari aged about 15 years had gone to the house of her uncle Jageshwar Ram at Ravidas Mohalla, P.S. Doranda, district Ranchi for appearing in the matriculation examination of Jharkhand Board, which was to commence from 25.02.2003 from her house at Baburam Toli, Bundu P.S. - Bundu District Ranchi. It was further alleged that the daughter of the informant namely Soni Kumari aged about 15 years had also accompanied her cousin Sanju as an attendant and they were staying at the residence of their uncle Jageshwar Ram at Ravidas Mohalla, Doranda Ranchi. It was further alleged in the FIR that in the night of 22/23.02.2003 at about 2.00 a.m. in the night, both the girls were found missing from the house of their uncle. The informant stated that he started search of missing girls on 23-24 of February at Bundu and suspected that the accused Chota Raju @ Raju Machuwa along with one Madan Machua, the resident of Baburam Toli, Bundu were also missing from the same day might have either enticed the girls or kidnapped/abducted both the girls who were minors.

3. On the basis of the above written report (typed) a formal FIR was drawn and a case under Doranda P.S. Case No. 60/2003, u/s 363, 366A/34 of IPC was registered against the accused and another and S.I. Ashok Kumar took up the investigation of the case. The I.O. recorded the statement of informant and other witnesses, inspected the P.O. During investigation, the I.O. came to know that the accused-appellant was at Chakradharpur and he was accordingly arrested from Chakradharpur at the house of his relative Chamra Machua. The I.O. further got information during investigation that one of the victim girls Soni Kumari managed to escape from the clutches of the kidnappers and had come to Ranchi and he accordingly proceeded and recorded the statement of victim girl Soni Kumari. The I.O. submitted charge-sheet under sections 452, 366 and 366A/34 of IPC against accused and investigation was kept pending against another accused Madan Machua and recovery of another victim girl Sanju Kumari. On the basis of charge-sheet in the Court, the learned CJM, Ranchi took the cognizance of the offences and accordingly the case was committed to the court of sessions and the learned trial court framed the charge on 30 July 2003 for the offence punishable under section 366/34, 366A/34 and 452/34 of IPC and after conducting the full fledged trial, passed the impugned judgement of conviction and order of sentence, which is under challenge in this appeal.

4. Heard Mr. Akhouri Anjani Kumar the learned defence cou