An offence under Section 363 IPC requires proof of active taking or enticing a minor from lawful guardianship. If a minor leaves parental care of their own free will without being influenced by the accused's inducement or force, the act does not constitute kidnapping under Section 361 read with 363 IPC.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The above appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 23.08.2012 passed in Sessions case No.20 of 21.11.2011 arising out of FIR No.47 dated 26.07.2011 registered under Sections 363, 366, 366-A, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) at Police Station Kotwali, District Kapurthala to the extent whereby the appellant was convicted for offence under Section 363 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and also imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/- while he was acquitted for commission of offences under Sections 366, 366-A and 376 IPC.

2. Briefly summarized, the FIR in the present case was lodged at the statement of Bhagatvir Singh son of Swaran Singh, on the allegations that his eldest daughter, Ravinder Kaur @ Ruby, had been studying in Sahibzada Ajit Singh Public School, Noorpur Rajputtan, in 10+2. On 16.7.2011, they went to sleep in their room after having a meal. On 17.7.2011 at about 6.00 AM, he found that his daughter, namely Ravinder Kaur @ Ruby, was missing from her room. He searched for her here and there and also enquired about her from his relatives but she was nowhere to be found. He believed that his daughter Ruby had been enticed/ seduced by Varinder Singh @ Ghonu, who, after conspiring with his father Gurdeep Singh, sister Surjit Singh @ Jit, Gurjit Kaur @ Sonu, residents of Jhal Thikriwala, took his daughter away to marry her. An FIR was lodged on these allegations. The accused persons were arrested, the statement of the victim was also recorded, and she revealed that she had been taken away to Bombay by accused Varinder Singh and Dilbagh Singh, who had connived with other accused. Accused Gurdeep Singh, Surjit Kaur and Gurjit Kaur were found innocent, and challan was presented against the remaining accused viz. the appellant, Soma Singh, Jograj Singh and Dilbagh Singh in the Court.

3. Copies of documents as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C were supplied to all the accused free of cost. Thereafter, the case was committed to the court of Ld. Sessions Judge by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala vide order dated 7.11.2011.

4. The accused were charge sheeted under Sections 363, 366-A, 376/120-B IPC on 21.11.2011, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. To prove its case, the prosecution examined PW1 Dr. Simmy Dhawan, Medical Officer, who medically examined Ravinder Kaur @ Ruby and proved on record application moved by the police for medico-legal examination of the victim Ex.PWI/A, endorsement of SMO Ex.PWI/B, her report Ex.PWI/C, report of chemical examiner Ex.PWI/D, original report produced in the court Ex.PWI/E.

6. PW2 Dr. Atul Rattan conducted the medico-legal examination of accused Varinder Singh and proved on record application moved by the police Ex.PW2/A, endorsement of the SMO Ex.PW2/B, his report Ex.PW2/C

7. PW3 Ravinder Kaur, the victim, supported the version of the prosecution and proved on record her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C Ex.PW3/A.

8. PW4 HC Kartar Singh, in whose presence the accused persons were arrested and the victim was recovered from the custody of accused Varinder Singh and Dilbagh Singh, proved on record the recovery memo of the victim Ex.PW4/As, memo Ex.PW4/B vide which the prosecutrix was handed over to her maternal uncle, arrest memo of Varinder Singh Ex.PW4/C, and his personal search memo, Ex.PW4/D. PW5 SI Sarabjit Singh, Inves