Judgment Nirmal Singh, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment/order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide which the appellant has been convicted under Section 366 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo R.I. for three months. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on February 16, 1998, in the area of village Pandori Musharkati, Kashmir Singh appellant kidnapped Darshana alias Darsho with intent that she may be compelled or seduced to illicit intercourse and the appellant committed rape upon her. 3. After completion of the investigation, the challan as presented before the Judicial Magistrate, since the offence committed by the appellant was triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions under Sections 376/366 I.P.C. 4. To prove the case, the prosecution examined PW1 Dr. B.S. Parmar; PW2 Dr. Satpal Kaur; PW-3 Gurmel Singh Statistical Assistant; PW4 Darsho the prosecutrix; PW-5 Janak Raj; PW-6 Gurmej Singh and PW-7 Piara Singh and closed its evidence. 5. When the appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr. I.P.C. to explain incriminating evidence, he took the plea that Darsho, the prosecutrix wanted to many him but her parents were not agreeing to the marriage proposal and thus, a false case has been registered against him. 6. After perusing the evidence of the prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. but convicted and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph 1 of the judgment. 7. Aggrieved by the said judgment/order, the present appeal has been filed. 8. None has appeared on behalf of the appellant. With the assistance of the learned D.A.G. Punjab, I have perused the record of the case. 9. The learned Sessions Judge in paragraph 9 has not believed the statement of the prosecutrix Darsho, Para 9 reads as under : "Darsho has claimed that she was forced by Kashmir Singh under threat to accompany him. This statement of Darsho is not very convincing. She admitted having love affairs with Kashmir Singh and wanted to marry him. She had obviously been keen to do in the company of Kashmir Singh. This statement of Darsho is not very convincing. She admitted having love affairs with Kashmir Singh and wanted to marry him. She had obviously been keen to do in the company of Kashmir Singh. In this situation, it is difficult to accept that the accused first took her to his tubewell and had sexual intercourse with her. The natural conduct of both Kashmir Singh and Darsho would have been to escape from the village last their presence in each others company is noted and their plan of elopement is frustrated. Whatever rape was committed, it must have been at some other place. Darsho gives description two places where she was subjected to sexual intercourse and the same is Rajpura and Qadian. The evidence is missing as to the district in which both these places are situate. It cannot be said that any rape was committed within the jurisdiction of this Court. I thus drop the offence under Section 376 I.P.C." 10. I have carefully perused the statement of the prosecutrix in which she stated that she met Kashmir Singh for many months before the day he took her. She also admitted that she has exchanged letters with Kashmir Singh. She also sent letters Exs.DB to DF. These letters are in her hands. She had also written to Kashmir Singh the appellant that she wanted to marry him. From her statement, it is established that she eloped with the appellant of her own consent and she was not kidnapped. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove its case that the appellant had kidnapped the prosecutrix Darsho. 11. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is accepted. The conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant is set aside.