IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.303 of 2014 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2012 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ======================================================

Amit Kumar Mandal @ Amit Kumar @ Amit Mandal, Son of Laxman Mandal, Resident of village- Bhramarpur Satiyana tola P.S.- Bihpur, Distt.

Bhagalpur ... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Abhas Chandra, Amicus Curiae For the State : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Addl. P.P.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 12-02-2026 No one appears on behalf of the appellant and the instant appeal is old one.

2. Considering the aforesaid aspect, Mr. Abhas Chandra, learned Advocate, who is present in Court, is requested to assist this Court in this matter as Amicus Curiae. The trial court records are handed over to him for perusal of the relevant materials.

3. After some time, the matter is taken up again. Mr.

Abhas Chandra, learned Amicus Curiae, and Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, are heard at length.

4. The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 05.04.2014 and the order of sentence dated 15.04.2014 passed by the learned IIIrd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Khagaria, in Sessions Case No. 379 of 2012 arising out of Mansi P.S. Case No. 122 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 1195 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has further been directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year.

Prosecution Story:-

5. The crux of the prosecution case is that the informant’s minor daughter, aged about fifteen years, went missing on 03.06.2012. On the morning of the said day, she allegedly fled away from her house taking with her several ornaments, as detailed in the F.I.R. Thereafter, efforts were made to trace her whereabouts. Ultimately, on 16.06.2012, Shivaji Mandal, the uncle of the informant, came to her house and informed her that the victim had been seen at the house of the appellant. According to the said Shivaji Mandal, the appellant was his co-villager. The informant has alleged in the F.I.R. that the appellant, who was having criminal antecedents at the time of the alleged occurrence, had kidnapped her minor daughter.

6. The appellant was charged for the offence punishable under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

7. During trial, altogether nine prosecution witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution, who are as follows:–

8. In documentary evidence, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the written report submitted by the informant on the basis of which the formal F.I.R. was instituted, the injury report of the victim and her supplementary injury report, including the report of the Medical Board which examined her, were brought on record and exhibited. Besides the aforesaid documents, the formal F.I.R. of the present case, bearing Mansi P.S. Case No. 122 of 2012, was also exhibited and marked as Exhibit-5.

Submission by learned Amicus Curiae:-

9. Mr. Abhas Chandra, learned Amicus Curiae, submits that in view of the evidence of the victim herself, the present case pertains to an elopement and a consensual marriage between the victim and the appellant. It is further submitted that though the age of the victim was mentioned as 15 years in the F.I.R., the Medical Board assessed her age to be between 15 and 17 years. If a margin of two years is added to the upper side of the age assessed by the Medical Board, the victim may be treated as having attained majority at the time of the alleged occurrence