JUDGMENT 1. - Appellants Noor Mohammed and Gul Mohammad have preferred this appeal against the judgment of Sessions Judge, Bikaner, dated February 7, 1975 convicting and sentencing each of them under Section 366 Indian Penal Code to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs 50/-, in default of payment of which further rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. They were also convicted and sentenced under section 341 IPC. to rigorous imprisonment for two months. The sentences were to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case was this Lalkhan resident of village Gulam wala has to daughters Fatti and Ajmat aged 13 and 10 years respectively. On 20.12 1973 Fatti and Ajmat were in their field. Lalkhan and his wife had gone to another field in village Jodasar. In the evening the two appellants came to the field of Fatti and Ajmat and told them their father was calling them.He would come to their appellants 'dhani' in the evening. Appellants came on a camel. Ajmat and Fatti believed the appellants and went with them to their field. Lalkhan returned to his field in the evening at about sunset and did not find his daughters. Hussainkhan is the son-in-law of Lalkhan. His field is in the neighbourhood of the field of Lalkhan. Hussainkban informed Lalkhan that the appellants had taken the two daughters to their field. Lalkhan therefore, with Hussainkhan went to the field of the appellants. They heard the cries of Ajmat and Fatti and rushed to the spot. They found that the appellants were holding the two daughters and further they threatened Lalkhan and Hussainkhan. Lalkhan raised an alarm and therefore, the appellants escaped on their camel. Ajmat and Fatti told their father that the appellants represented them that he was to come to their field and were being called by him. They, therefore, accompanied the appellants to their field. There the appellants requested them to marry and they also promised them rich rewards. They did not agree and therefore, the appellants abused and misbehaved with them. They even tried to commit rape. It appears that Lalkhan did not immediately make a report to the police but on 26-12-1973 presented a written report Ex. P.1 to S.P., Bikaner which ultimately came to police station Baju. On receipt of this report FIR. Ex P. 12 was drawn up and Kishankant Circle Officer, p.W.7 started and completed the usual investigation. It appears that Lalkhan did not immediately make a report to the police but on 26-12-1973 presented a written report Ex. P.1 to S.P., Bikaner which ultimately came to police station Baju. On receipt of this report FIR. Ex P. 12 was drawn up and Kishankant Circle Officer, p.W.7 started and completed the usual investigation. A charge sheet was preferred against the appellants in the court of Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bikaner, who committed the case to the Sessions for trial. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned APP. and perused the record of the case carefully. 4. It was vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Sessions Judge was in error in believing the inherently improbable story of the prosecution which was sought to be proved by the interested testimony of the four witnesses which was not corroborated by any other circumstance. The learned Sessions judge failed to consider the fact that she first information report of the incident was lodged on 26-12-1973, six days after the incident. The prosecution did not explain the delay in lodging the FIR, I have considered the contention carefully. The learned Sessions Judge with regard to the delay observed: "If some occurrence is found to have taken place, then delay in lodging of the first information report would cease to be material. Though the evidence of the witnesses is to be appreciated in the context that the first information report in the case has not been promptly lodged." The learned Sessions judge while believing the two girls observed:- "The testimony of these two witnesses is to be read as a whole and if ring of truth pervades through their testimony, then stray infirmities, if any, found in their statement would not in any way affect their reliability. Both these child witnesses have been cross- examined at length. They have well withstood the cross-examination and in my opinion they have successfully acquitted them selves in cross-examination. Their testimony in cross examination has not at all been shaken so as to affect their reliability. The accused persons are of the same village. They were known to both these witnesses. They have also been visiting sometimes the Dhani of Noor Mohd. Their testimony in cross examination has not at all been shaken so as to affect their reliability. The accused persons are of the same village. They were known to both these witnesses. They have also been visiting sometimes the Dhani of Noor Mohd. accused There was nothing unnatural in believing the representation made by the accused persons to both these girls and it cannot be successfully contended that when their father was to return to Gulamwala, then would have left the field." He was further influenced by the fact that: "I would also like to mention this aspect of the case, which very much appeals to me, that where was the necessity of introducing these two child witnesses for connecting such a case against the accused persons. The complainant, in my opinion, would have been the last person to introduce his own daughters of tender age and that too not one but two daughters. Further it may also be pointed out that the complainant had no scores to settle with the accused persons. It is inconceivable that there could be a smoke without a fire." I have considered the observations made by the learned Sessions Judge very carefully. The learned A.P.P. also tried to support the prosecution case on these very lines. I could not understand that if the complainant wanted to fabricate a false case of abduction against the appellants, then how it was possible without the introduction of the two child witnesses, i.e. his daughters. This circumstance therefore, is of little importance that two girls of tender age are coming forward to depose against the appellant. 5. The delay in lodging the FIR is of considerable importance in this case because, the complainant has given no explanation for the same. It is a typed report, the phraseology of which suggests that it was submitted to' the Supdt of Police after due consultation and deliberation. The complainant stated in the FIR Ex.P.1 that the appellant had the intention to rape his daughters and then to sell them is some where. This was a very bold assertion which appears to be from the facts and circumstances of the case as I would presently hereinafter indicate. 6. It may be stated that apart from the oral testimony of the two girls and their father and brother-in-law, there is not as iota of evidence to corroborate the prosecution case. This was a very bold assertion which appears to be from the facts and circumstances of the case as I would presently hereinafter indicate. 6. It may be stated that apart from the oral testimony of the two girls and their father and brother-in-law, there is not as iota of evidence to corroborate the prosecution case. The case, therefore, hinges purely on the oral testimony of these witnesses and even the FIR is not available as a check to test the truth of their statements. In such cases the FIR is of vital importance. In the present case the delay in lodging the FIR is of such of vital importance that it is enough by itself to throw away the prosecution case. It was thus observed in Ram jag and others v. State of U.P. (1974 Cr. LJ. 479) "Whether the delay is so long as to throw a cloud of suspicion on the seeds of the prosecution case must depend upon a variety of factors. Even a long delay can be condoned if the witnesses have no motive for implicating the accused. On the other hand, prompt filing of the report is not an unmistakable guarantee of the version of the prosecution. It is true that witnesses cannot be called upon to explain every hour's delay in filing information and a common sense view has to be taken in ascertaining whether the First Information Report was lodged after an undue delay so as to afford enough scope for manipulating evidence." The observations in Thulia Kali v. State of Tamil Nadu (1972 Cr.L.J., 1296) are also relevant in this respect:- "First information report in a criminal case is an extremely vital and valuable piece of evidence for the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the trial. The importance of the report can hardly be over estimated from the stand point of the accused. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the police in respect of commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits & the part played by them as well as the names of eye- witnesses present at the scene of occurrence. Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of after thought. Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of after thought. On account of delay, the report not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity, danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account of concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation. It is, therefore, essential that the delay in the lodging of the first information report should be satisfactorily explained." When an occurrence is not reported for more than 20 hours after the occurrence even though the police station is only two miles from the place of occurrence it is unsafe to base conviction upon the evidence." I am laying emphasis in the delay in lodging the FIR because the prosecution case is sought to be substantiated only on the basis of the oral testimony of the four interested witnesses unsupported and uncorroborated by any other circumstance brought on the record of the case. For appreciating the oral statement of interested witness it was so observed in Dhanna v. State (1950 RLW 357) : "Where an interested witness makes a verbal statement as regards the existence of certain facts and it is possible for the court to put it to a test in the light of checks available on the record, it should not be easily accepted unless it is corroborated and stands the test." I am left with the oral testimony of the four witnesses and on its intrinsic worth it does not appear to be reliable. Fatti and Ajmat stated that the appellants came to their field on a camel and represented to them that their father would come to the 'Dhani' and they were required there. The two sisters are contradicting each other in this respect Fatti stated that the appellants told them that their father would come to the 'Dhani' while Ajmat stated that their father was already in the dhani. The witnesses further stated that they accompanied the appellants on the camel to their field. Their father was not there. The appellants asked them to marry them and promised them good house, ornaments and pleasure trip to Bikaner. Noor Mohammed asked Fatti to marry him and Gul Mohammed asked Ajmat for marriage. They denied and rejected the offer and raised an alarm. The appellants then pulled and pushed them and their clothes were torn. Their father was not there. The appellants asked them to marry them and promised them good house, ornaments and pleasure trip to Bikaner. Noor Mohammed asked Fatti to marry him and Gul Mohammed asked Ajmat for marriage. They denied and rejected the offer and raised an alarm. The appellants then pulled and pushed them and their clothes were torn. Then their father Lalkhan and brother-in-law Hussain arrived there and rescued them. I have considered the statement of these two witnesses very carefully which appear to me inherently improbable. Both the witnesses have admitted in their statements that on most of the occasions they remained in their field alone and even slept there alone. The appellants were their neighbours, yet strangely enough the two witnesses have not deposed that the appellants ever misbehaved with them prior to the occurrence. If the appellants had any evil design in respect of these girls, they have ample opportunity and occasions at least to misbehave with these girls. They could have attacked them on any night when they were alone in the field. There fore, the story of abduction is improbable. 7. It is alleged in the FIR that the appellants had the intention to rape the girls and then sell them away. This again appears to be untrue. The two girls were hardly aged between 11.13 years and could not be said to be of the age to attract the appellants. One of the appellants is 40 years of age and therefore, the intention imputed to the appellants does not appear to be true. It is not shown that the appellants were persons of evil character. A man of normal character and behaviour would hardly design or would have the capacity to abduct and sell the two girls of their neighbourhood. That apart, if the appellant wanted to rape the two girls, they would have not taken them to the 'dhani' of appellant Noor Mohammed where his parents resided. It was not expected that the parents of Noor Mohammed would approve of the immoral act of the two appellants. This is another infirmity in the prosecution case. 8. The appellants did not outrage the modesty of the two girls after they were taken to the fields. The story of pulling and pushing appears to be absurd. The appellants had no motive in doing so. This is another infirmity in the prosecution case. 8. The appellants did not outrage the modesty of the two girls after they were taken to the fields. The story of pulling and pushing appears to be absurd. The appellants had no motive in doing so. The appellants could have abducted the girls straight from their field to some other place yet they were taken to the field of Neor Mohammed. The appellants fully knew that the father of the girls is likely to return in the evening and the neighbouring 'dhani' was hardly a place where the girls could be safely concealed. The conduct of the appellants in not attempting to rape the girls or outraging their modesty throws a grave suspicion on the improbable story of the prosecution. No man would commit a crime without ensuring his success. Something could be said if the appellants were found in the company of these two girls at some other place and were seen by some independent witness. However, the fact that the girls were found in the field of Noor Mohammed is right to be substantiated by the interested testimony of Lalkhan and Hussainkhan. It is difficult to place any reliance on their testimony. The story of abduction therefore, appears to be a made up one. In these circumstances, I am of the view that it would not be safe to arrive at a finding of the guilt of the appellants only on the basis of oral testimony of interested witnesses. If the two girls are disbelieved, it is not difficult, to discard the testimony of their father Lalkhan and brother-in-law Hussainkhan. It may be noticed that Lalkhan has admitted in his cross-examination that a few days before the alleged incident that he had a quarrel with Ahmed. It is difficult to conjure why Lalkhan was implicating the appellants falsely. However, it is also difficult to imagine why the appellants would be driven to commit this crime on that day. It is admitted by the two girls that prior to the incident the appellants met them on several occasions, yet did not misbehave with them. It is inconceivable that the appellants could abduct the two girls to the 'dhani' of Noor Mohammed where his parents lived. If the two appellants intended any evil design against these girls, they would have abducted the girls to some unknown place. It is inconceivable that the appellants could abduct the two girls to the 'dhani' of Noor Mohammed where his parents lived. If the two appellants intended any evil design against these girls, they would have abducted the girls to some unknown place. For all these reasons, I am of the view that it is not safe to convict the appellants for any offence. 9. In the result the appeal is accepted and the Appellants Noor Mohammed and Gul Mohammed are acquitted of the offence under section 366 and 341 IPC. They are on bail and need not surrender to their bail bonds which are hereby discharged.Appeal accepted. *******