The delay in lodging the first information report and contradictions in witness testimony can render the prosecution's case unreliable and lead to the acquittal of the accused.

Ranjana Pandya, J.

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 26.09.2015 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Pilibhit in Sessions Trial No. 319 of 2013 (State vs Ayyub) arising out of Case Crime No. 739 of 2012, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Pilibhit, District Pilibhit, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 363 IPC; seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 366 IPC and ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 15,000/- under section 376 IPC with default stipulation. Out of fine so deposited by the appellant, half of the same was directed to be paid to the victim.

2. Filtering out the unnecessary details, the prosecution case is that a written report was given by Maqsood Ahmad, son of Mansoor Ahmad, resident of Bujkasawan, Police Station Kotwali Pilibhit, District Pilibhit on 05.11.2012 at 4.30 P.M. mentioning therein that his daughter (victim), aged about 13 years is missing since 03.11.2012. She has taken away Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) and two tolas gold with her. The informant made a search of his daughter in the neighbourhood and in relations but when she could not be traced, he lodged the report against Ayyub, Guddu, Sharafat, Babu sons of Liyakat and Yunus on the basis of suspicion on 05.11.2012. On the basis of which a case was registered at case crime No. 739 of 2012, under sections 363, 366 IPC, which was mentioned in the GD vide report No. 42. After the registration of the case, the case was entrusted to SI Rakesh Singh. He copied the chik report and GD report in the case diary and recorded the statement of the chik writer. On 07.11.2012, he recorded the statement of the first informant Maqsood. Thereafter, he inspected the spot and prepared the site plan, Exhibit Ka-5. On 03.01.2013, he recovered the victim from near the roadways bus stand and prepared its memo, which he proved as Exhibit Ka-6. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of the victim, on the basis of which Section 376 IPC was added. On 07.01.2013, he copied the medical report in the case diary. The age of the victim was found to be 16 to 17 years. On 04.04.2013, after taking permission of the court, he recorded the statement of accused. After completion of the investigation, he submitted the charge sheet, which he proved as Exhibit Ka-7.

3. The prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses. PW-1 is the informant Maqsood, the father of the victim. PW-2 is the victim of the case. PW-3 is Dr. Mahavir Singh. PW-4 is Dr. Anita Chaurasia. PW-5 is S.I., Rakesh Singh, Investigating Officer. PW-6 is Constable Sukhvir Singh.

4. PW-1 is Maqsood Ahmad, the informant and father of the victim. He deposed that on the date of occurrence, the age of the victim was about 13 years. On that day when the accused came to his house and asked his daughter to accompany him as his father is ill. At that time he was at his shop. When he came back home at 06: 30 - 07: 00 P.M., his daughter-in-law told him that the victim has gone away with Ayyub and did not come back yet. The victim has taken away Rs. 50,000/- and two tolas gold as the accused has told the victim that his father is ill. When this witness met the mother and brother of the accused, the victim was not present there. When the victim could not be traced out in spite of hectic search, he lodged the report, which he proved as Exhibit Ka-1. His daughter was traced out after one and a half months.

5. PW-2 is the victim of the case. She deposed that she knows the accused Ayyub. He used to come to her house before the occurrence. He considers the mother of the victim as his sister. On the date of occurrence, accused came to her house and asked as to where is her mother. She replied that she has gone to attend a religious function (Milad). Then he asked that her father h