The judgment established that the absence of evidence of force or deception, suspicious conduct of the victim, and lack of corroborative medical evidence can cast doubt on allegations of kidnapping and rape.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The instant criminal appeal is preferred on behalf of the appellant against impugned Judgment of Conviction dated 29th January, 2011 and Order of Sentence dated 3rd February, 2011 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial No.443 of 2008, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 8 years along with fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine he was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. Further the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 years along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months for the offence under Section 366 of I.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case leading to this criminal appeal are that the informant – Kailash Thakur gave the information with the police station concerned with these allegations that on 10th April, 2008, he left his house for Argadda at 6 o’ clock of morning to distribute the marriage cards. At around 11:30 o’ clock he received the phone call from his nephew Aditya Thakur that his 17 years old daughter Punam Kumari had gone to respond the call of nature at 7:30 o’ clock of morning and did not come back. Having received this information, the informant came back to his house at Pelawal and made search of his daughter. The informant’s wife told him that his daughter had gone alone to respond the call of nature. During search, Manoj Thakur and Ramdhani Thakur told them that his daughter Punam Kumari was seen by them when she was talking with the accused Farid Alam in the evening of 8th April, 2008. Later on it also came to know that the victim (daughter of the informant) had been enticed away by Farid Alam with intent to marry her. On this written information, the Case Crime No.86 of 2008 was registered under Section 363, 366-A of the I.P.C. against Farid Alam.

4. The Investigating Officer after having concluded the investigation filed charge-sheet against accused/appellant – Farid Alam under Sections 363, 366-A read with 34 and 376 of the I.P.C. against Farid Alam and Khurshid Alam before the court concerned and the court concerned after having taken the cognizance thereon had committed the case for trial to the court of Sessions Judge.

5. The trial court framed the charge against the accused Farid Alam and Khurshid Alam for the offence under Sections 363/366-A/376/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was read over to both the accused, who denied the charge and claimed for trial.

6. On behalf of the prosecution to prove the charge against the accused persons in oral evidence examined P.W.1-Rajan Kumar, P.W.2- Manoj Kumar Thakur, P.W.3-Savita Devi, P.W.4- Punam Kumari, P.W.5-Ramdhani Thakur, P.W.6-Ram Suresh Prasad, P.W.-7 Kailash Thakur and P.W.8- Dr. R.S. Vandana.

7. On behalf of the prosecution in documentary evidence adduced signature of victim on her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Ext.1, formal F.I.R. Ext.2, written report Ext.3, signature of the doctor on medical report Ext.4.

8. The statement of accused persons under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein the accused persons denied the incriminating circumstances against them and stated themselves to be innocent.

9. On behalf of the accused in defence evidence examined D.W.-1 Md. Akhtar and in documentary evidence adduced the letters, Ext. A and A/1.

10. The learned trial court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties passed the impugned judgment of conviction against appellant – Farid Alam for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code acquitting the accused Khurshid Alam from the charges levell