Judgment S.K.Chattopadhyaya, J. 1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction dated 18-5-1995 the appellant preferred this appeal. 2. On the basis of information filed by Deo Kumar Nayak (Mama of the victim girl), FIR was lodged on 21-8-1991. Aitegation, inter alia, was that his 13 years old Bhagani was missing since 16-2-1991 and after enquiry, he could know that she was kidnapped by the appellant and kept her at Ranchi. The case was registered at Gumla and police recovered the girl and her statement under Section 164, Cr. P. C. was recorded. After investigation chargesheet was submitted and case was committed to the Court of Sessions. During course of trial, the victim girl namely, Jatri Kumari was examined as PW 5 and she told the name of some other accused persons and on such disclosure, co-accused ware summoned to face the trial. At the first instance, 5 PWs were examined, out of which PWs 1 and 2 are formal in nature. PW 3 is the informant, PW 4, Nagu Naik is the father of the victim girl. PW 5 is the girl, who was said to have been kindapped. 3. On behalf of the appellant, DW i, Om Prakash Singh, the Magistrate was examined who recorded the statement of the girl under Section 164, Cr. P. C. DW 2 is a formal, who proved the signature of jailor on the letter. Ext. A is the statement under Section 164 and medical report dated 26-4-1991 is Ext. 2. 4. Without going into the detailed discussions of the evidences of all the PWs, it is sufficient to consider the statement of the Victim giri recorded under Section 164, Cr. P. C. vis-a-vis her statement before the Court. The date of occurrence is said to be 16-2-1991 and information was given to the police on 21-3-1991 i. e. after 35 days. The statement of the victim girl, Jatri Kumari was recorded on 15th May, 1991. In her statement, she has stated her age as 20 years. Categorical statement has been made while she was residing in her Mamas house (the informant). She was being tortured everyday. On the night previous to the date of occurrence, the Mama threatened her with a sword in his hand and drove her out. She was made to starve from three days continuously. Categorical statement has been made while she was residing in her Mamas house (the informant). She was being tortured everyday. On the night previous to the date of occurrence, the Mama threatened her with a sword in his hand and drove her out. She was made to starve from three days continuously. She was acquainted with the appallant from before for which also her Mama had threatened her. On the fateful day, she came to the house of the appellant and she was taken to Bokaro. She married to the appellant and surrendered in the court. However, it appears that in her statement before the court she has completely changed her version and supported the allegation made by her Mama. From perusal of the order of the lower court dated 7-5-1991 (Chief Judicial Magistrate) it appears that Jatri Kumari suo motu offered herself to record her statement under Section 164, Cr. P. C. On such petition being filed, her statement was recorded as such. 5. Ext. 2 is the forwarding letter of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Gumla, which reveils that Jatri Kumari was examined by a Medical Board on 26-4-1991. The Medical Board found that she was aged in between 18-20 years. No mark of recent intercourse was found and on the date of examination she was carrying five months. 6. The prosecution, in order to support the case, has not examined any independent witness and only witnesses are PW 4, the father and PW 3, the Mama (informant) of the victim girl. On appraisal of the evidences, I am of the opinion, that the learned trial court has completely misdirected himself by not noticing the basic ingredients for an offence under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code. As noticed earlier, the girl is aged about 20 years and due to mal treatment of her Mama she left the house suo motu. She had some intemacy with the appellant, as a aresult of which, she was taken to Bokaro and then to Ranchi. PW 3 in his evidence, has stated that when he cama to Ranchi in search of his Bhagani, one day he found the appellant as well as the girl moving in a tempo. Surprisingly, he did not lodge any information in the Ranchi Police. On the other hand, he had gone back to Gumla to lodge a report. PW 3 in his evidence, has stated that when he cama to Ranchi in search of his Bhagani, one day he found the appellant as well as the girl moving in a tempo. Surprisingly, he did not lodge any information in the Ranchi Police. On the other hand, he had gone back to Gumla to lodge a report. Another aspect of the matter, which has missed the attention of the trial court is that the FIR was filed after 35 days and there was no plausible explanation for such delay. 7. From the record of the case, it appears that the appellant surrendered before the court below on 23-4-1991 and since then he is in jail custody continuously except for some period, when he was granted provisional bail by the court below. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years, out of which he has already spent five years in jail. 8. Taking into consideration all these aspect of the matter, I allow this appeal, set aside the order of conviction and sentence and the appellant, Md. Ismail Ansari is directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.