The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistent evidence from the victim led to the appellant's acquittal.

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH)

Date : 08-01-2026 Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, assisted by Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned APP for the State, are present and have been heard.

2. No one has appeared on behalf of Respondent No.

2 (informant) to oppose the appeal, despite valid service of notice as per order dated 17.12.2025.

3. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 08.02.2023 and the order of sentence dated 16.02.2023 & 17.02.2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI cum Special Judge, POCSO Court, at Biharsharif, Nalanda, in POCSO/G.R. Case No. 5318 of 2018, arising out of Bihar P.S. Case No. 540 of 2018. By the said judgment and order, the learned trial court convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 3 66 and 376AB of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘ IPC ’), offences under Section 3 (a) punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, ‘POCSO Act’), and the offence under Section 5 (1)(m) punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) for the offence under 76AB of , and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months simple imprisonment for each sentence. All sentences are directed to run concurrently.

Prosecution Story :-

4. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that the informant, father of the victim, alleged that on 24.11.2018, while he was outside his house performing his duty and his wife was at her shop, the appellant came to his house and kidnapped his minor daughter, aged about ten years. Thereafter, the appellant took his daughter to a secluded place and established a physical relationship with her ten to fifteen times. After becoming aware of the incident, when he (informant) contacted the appellant on his mobile number 9135808814, the appellant assured him that he would return the victim. Relying on this assurance, he (informant) waited for the victim until 25.11.2018; however, she did not return. Consequently, he (informant) lodged the case on 26.11.2018 at Bihar Police Station. The informant further alleged that the appellant is his landlord’s son and that the appellant’s family members assisted him in taking away the victim. Moreover, when he and his wife went to the house of the accused persons to lodge a protest, they were abused and assaulted by the appellant’s family members.

5. The informant filed his written application (Exhibit P-6) to lodge the FIR. On that basis, a formal FIR was registered for offences under Sections 3 63 and 365 read with Section 3 4 of IPC against the appellant and others vide Bihar P.S. Case No. 540/2018 dated 26.11.2018, and investigation commenced. After completion of the investigation, the appellant and others were chargesheeted for offences under 63, 365, and 376 of , and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The appellant was charged for offences under 63, 366A, and 376 of , as well as offence under read with of the POCSO Act, and offence under Section 6 read with Section 5 of the POCSO Act.

6. During the trial, the prosecution produced and examined the following witnesses :-

7. In documentary evidence, the prosecution exhibited and proved the following documents:-

8. Ext. P-7/PW 7 Admission Register of victim

8. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellant was recorded under Section