The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in evidence lead to acquittal.

1. Heard Mr. S. S. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Ratan Datta, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent - State.

2. This criminal appeal has been filed under S.374 of Cr. P.C. against the judgment dated 18.12.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Agartala, West Tripura in connection with Case No. Special (POCSO) 43 of 2018 sentencing the appellant to suffer SI for 4 years for the offence punishable under S.363 of IPC and also suffer SI for a term of 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. Both the sentences shall concurrently.

3. The present case was instituted upon a police report, as FIR No.2018 / WEA / 038 dated 27.04.2018. Briefly, the fact of the case is that one Pradip Sutradhar submitted a written petition to the effect that on 26.06.2018 at about 1900 to 1930 hours the minor daughter of the informant i.e. the victim (name withheld) was kidnapped by the appellant, namely, Binoy Das alias Sunai with the help of other FIR named co - accuseds namely, Tapan Das, Smti. Ranu Das and Sanjit Ghosh when the minor victim girl went to a local shop to purchase some articles for her household. Hence, this appeal.

4. On receipt of such written complaint submitted by the complainant, the officer in charge of East Agartala Women P.S. treated as FIR and registered the case vide No.2018 / WEA / 038 dated 27.04.2018 under S.363/34 of IPC and under S.8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 (for short, POCSO Act).

5. The police took up the investigation on the basis of the FIR as mentioned above and during the investigation police recorded the statement of the available witnesses visited the place of occurrence, prepared the hand sketch map of the place of occurrence. Finally, on completion of investigation, IO filed charge sheet vide East Agartala Women P.S. Case No.78 of 2018 dated 19.09.2018 under Sections - 363/365/34 of IPC read with S.8 of the POCSO Act against all the aforementioned FIR named accused persons for facing trial in the open Court of law for the ends of justice.

6. During the trial, upon hearing submissions of parties and taking into consideration the record and documents submitted therewith, the Court of learned Sessions Judge (POCSO)Agartala, West Tripura framed charge against the accused persons under S.363/365/34 of IPC read with S.8 of the POCSO Act along with S.34 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. To substantiate the charge, the prosecution has adduced as many as 8(eight) witnesses and they were cross - examined by defense and thereafter the accused were examined under S.313 Cr. P.C. and after hearing the argument of both sides, the learned Court below by his judgment dated 18.12.2021 sentencing the accused person, namely, Bijoy Das alias Sunai as aforestated. The other co - accused persons were acquitted on the charges framed under S.363/365/34 of IPC against them, due to insufficiency of evidence available on record and set at liberty.

8. After hearing the arguments made by both sides and on perusal of the material evidence on record, the learned Court below delivered the judgment and order conviction and sentence dated 18.12.2021 against the accused - person. For the purpose of reference, the operative portion of the impugned judgment and order of conviction may be reproduced hereinbelow:
"In the result, accused namely, Sri Binoy Das alias Sunai is convicted on the charges framed under S.363 of the IPC and alternatively under S.8 of the POCSO Act. He is taken into custody and will be heard on question of sentence in due course of time of the d