RAM LABHAYA, J.: This petn. of revn. is directed against an order of the Addl. Ses. J., L.A.D., dated 22-6-1950 by which the convictions of the petnrs. u/s. 363, I. P. C., were confirmed & the sentences awarded to them upheld. The petnrs. were sentenced each to undergo R. I. for 3 months. They were also sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100/- each & in default of its payment to R. I. for one month. (2) The prosecution case was that the complain­ant Ganesh Kumar Bhowick was the guardian of the minor girl Kamala aged about 9 or 10 years. On 18-6-1949, the minor was removed from the custody of her guardian during his absence. The minor, according to the prosecution case, was kept confined in the house of Khudiram Biswas, petnr. 3. The petnrs. are said to have intended giving the minor away in marriage to petnr. 2. The learn­ed trial Mag. found that the girl was a minor & that she was removed from the custody of the complainant who was lawfully entrusted with the care & the custody of the minor. (3) The learned counsel for the petnrs. has raised only one contention. He has urged that the complainant was not the lawful guardian & there­fore conviction u/s. 363, I. P. C., could not be sustained. (4) We do not think that there is any force in this argument. It is true that the maternal grand­mother of the minor was alive & the complainant was a cousin. But the finding arrived at in the case is that the minor was living with the com­plainant, her cousin, since the death of her mother. She is an orphan. The maternal grandmother lived by begging. The complainant, therefore, had the custody of the minor with her consent which was necessarily implied. He was thus the 'de facto' guardian of the minor. At held in 'Banamali v. Emperor', (22 Pat 263), the lawful guardian u/s l 361, I. P. C., would include a 'de facto' guardian. In that case ,a married girl ran away from her husband's house. She remained away for a period of five or six years & lived with her mother. It Was held that she was not in the 'keeping' of her husband but of her mother within the meaning of S. 361. In that case ,a married girl ran away from her husband's house. She remained away for a period of five or six years & lived with her mother. It Was held that she was not in the 'keeping' of her husband but of her mother within the meaning of S. 361. (5) We agree with the view of the law taken in that case, & hold that in the circumstances of this case, the complainant being a 'de facto' guar­dian of the minor could be treated as lawful guardian for purposes of S. 361, I. P. C. (6) The convictions of the petnrs. in these cir­cumstances cannot be found to be illegal or un­sustainable & they must be maintained. The petnrs. were allowed bail as the term of imprisonment to which they were sentenced was short. No useful purpose would be served by sending them back to jail. The sentence of imprisonment in the case of each is reduced to the period already under­gone. The sentence of fine shall stand. The petn. is allowed to the extent indicated above. (7) The rule is disposed of accordingly. (8) THADANI, C. J.: I agree. D.H. Order accordingly.