Hon’ble Harsh Kumar, J.—The present criminal appeal has been filed by accused/appellant, the sole convict against the judgment and order dated 10.3.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Mau in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 2003 (State v. Ram Dularey and others), arising out of case crime No. 179 of 2002, under Sections 363 & 366 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, P.S. Dohari Ghat, District Mau. By the impugned judgment and order in trial against the appellant and three others, the learned lower Court did held only appellant Ram Dularey Yadav to be guilty of the offence and acquitted the three others and after hearing the convict on the point of sentence, sentenced him for the offence under Section 363 IPC for seven years’ rigorous imprisonment with Rs. 2000/- and under Section 366 IPC for ten years’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 3000/- and in case of default in payment of fine to further undergo six months’ imprisonment. By the present appeal the appellant has prayed that his conviction is liable to be set aside and allowing the appeal he may be acquitted of the charges.

2. Against the impugned judgment and order with respect to the acquittal of co-accused Ram Gyan Yadav, Surendra Yadav and Smt. Subhawati Devi, criminal revision No. 2218 of 2006 has also been filed by first informant Virendra Kumar Yadav seeking relief of setting aside their acquittal order and convicting them alongwith Ram Dularey for the offences under Sections 363 & 366 read with Section 34 IPC as well as for enhancement of sentence imposed on appellant Ram Dularey.

3. The FIR of this case was lodged by Virendra Kumar Yadav on 18.5.2002 at 00.10 a.m. against four persons named therein at Police Station Dohari Ghat, District Mau at case crime No. 179 of 2002, under Sections 363 & 366 IPC. The averments of FIR in brief are as under :

“That the victim, sister of the first informant, student of Class 9 aged about 13 years 3 months (D.O.B. 15.2.1989) proceeded to meet to her friend from the house of first informant; that there is a P.C.O. of Ram Dularey Yadav, who has enticed away the first informant’s sister at about 10.00 a.m. on 14.5.2002 when she was going to meet her friend and had taken her somewhere else from Rasoolpur Market; that the first informant made search of his sister for several days, but could not know her whereabouts and when he asked the accused persons, instead of making any help in search of his sister, they threatened him.”

4. After lodging of FIR, investigation was completed by the Investigating Officer and charge-sheet was submitted against four accused named in the FIR and after taking cognizance, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. After committal of case, in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 2003, charges were framed against all the four accused for committing the incident in question under Sections 363/34 and 366/34 IPC. The accused denied from the charges and claimed trial.

5. In order to prove its case and charges against the accused persons, the prosecution produced Laxmi Yadav and Kripa Yadav as eye-witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2, Virendra Kumar Yadav being first informant as PW-3, Shiv Kumar Singh, Sub-Inspector, Investigating Officer of the case as PW-4, Jagdish Yadav, Head Constable to prove the Chik FIR as PW-5 and Satya Ram, Assistant Teacher, to prove the age of the victim according to School Register as PW-6.

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., who did not produce any witness in defence evidence. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after hearing the parties’ counsel and perusal of record, by the impugned judgment and order acquitted the three persons named in the FIR and convicted the appellant Ram Dularey Yadav for the offence under Section 363 & 366 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above.

7. Heard Shri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Shri S.N. Yadav, learn