Judgment : ( 2 ) BOTH the appeals arise against the judgment and Order dated 18-5-1994, passed by the Sessions Judge, Deoghar in sessions Case No. 1 of 1994, whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted both the appellants under Section 366 of the Indian penal Code and sentenced them to undergo r. I. for a period of five years each. ( 3 ) THE charge against both the appellants were for abducting Mitali Ghosh from burdwan Railway Station on 19th July, 1993 with intention that the would be compelled to marry against her Will or she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse. ( 4 ) THE case of the prosecution, appearing from the F. I. R. lodged by Smt. Belarani ghosh (P. W. 6) is that at the relevant period, her daughter Mitali Ghosh, aged 17 years, was living with her maternal uncle, sushant Das (P. W. 4) at his Railway quarter, madhupur Colony. On 15-7-1993, Azad anwar [appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1994 (P)], and one Manoj Choudhary along with their three unknown friends, kidnapped the victim Mitali Ghosh (P. W. 5 ). However, with the help of Mohalla people, she was traced out on the following day i. e. on 16-7-1993 and at that time, Azad Anwar (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1994 (P)] had threatened that if his marriage was not performed with the victim girl, he can take any extreme step. At that time, the victim mitali Ghosh was weeping and was not speaking anything. Thereafter, on 19-7-1993, the mother of victim Mitali Ghosh was taking her daughter to native place by a train from Madhupur. At Asansol, the victim girl went to toilet in the train but when she did not return for a considerable time, the informant started searching for her and then learnt from the co-passengers that 4-5 boys had forcibly taken away the girl by holding her hand. The informant got down from the train at the next Station and informed the g. R. P. Thereafter, the informant and her relatives who were with her went back to madhupur and started searching the girl mitali but without any success. Subsequently, the victim girl Mitali Ghosh was recovered. The Police, after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet. The informant got down from the train at the next Station and informed the g. R. P. Thereafter, the informant and her relatives who were with her went back to madhupur and started searching the girl mitali but without any success. Subsequently, the victim girl Mitali Ghosh was recovered. The Police, after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet. ( 5 ) IN order to establish the charge, altogether twelve witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and on behalf of the defence, two defence witnesses were examined. The case of the defence was denial of the occurrence alleged and of false implication. ( 6 ) P. W.-1 Sunita Sarkar, in her evidence, started that she learnt from the maternal uncle of Mitali Ghosh that the girl had disappeared but, on the next day, she was recovered. On 15-7-1993, she along with victim Mitali Ghosh had gone to cinema show at Madhupur and after the cinema show, the victim girl came to her residence and after taking tea, she proceeded for her own residence. She further stated that she learnt from maternal uncle of the victim girl that mitali Ghosh had not reached her house. ( 7 ) P. W.-2 Prabal Sarkar is the husband of P. W.-1. He has also stated in the same line to that of his wife that he learned from the maternal uncle of victim Mitali Ghosh that she had not reached home. On searching, she was traced out on the following day. The maternal uncle of the victim told him that accused Azad Anwar, Ranjit and one manoj had kindnapped the victim from burdwan Station. ( 8 ) P. WS. 3 and 7 were tendered. P. W.-4 is Sushanta Kumar Das, the maternal uncle of victim Mitali Ghosh on whose quarter, she was residing. In his evidence, he has stated that on 19-7-1993, his sister Belarani, victim Mitali Ghosh and other relatives were going by 50 Down Train to their native place at Village Majdia, District Nadiya, West Bengal, but, on the same night, his sister returned to him and informed that accused azad Anwar and Manoj Choudhary and their friends who were following them in the said train, had kidnapped Mitali Ghosh at burdwan Station. He further stated that on 15-7-1993 also, while the victim was returning from cinema show, she became traceless. But, on the next morning only, she could be traced out. He further stated that on 15-7-1993 also, while the victim was returning from cinema show, she became traceless. But, on the next morning only, she could be traced out. ( 9 ) P. W.-5 is the victim girl who has deposed that on 19-7-1993, at about 1. 00 p. m. , she along with her mother and sister was going to her native place from madhupur by 50 Down Train. The train stopped at Burdwan. She went to Toilet and in front of Toilet, she saw that four boys were standing, who lifted her bodily from Train putting her in fear and forced her to proceed with them. She was also threatened to be killed if she raised alarm. Those persons brought her to Calcutta. She named the accused persons as Azad [appellant in criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1994 (P)], Manoj and prince. She also identified both the appellant in dock. She further stated that Azad Anwar kept her at Calcutta for two weeks in his sisters house and thereafter removed her to the house of sister of Prince where she remained for two days. From there, she was brought to Chittaranjan by train and from chittaranjan to Dumka by Bus. Azad Anwar kept her two days in his uncles house and the uncle of the accused Azad Anwar brought her to Deoghar Court and instructed her to state before the Court that she had gone to the house of one of her friends. From the Court, she was sent to Remand Home. ( 10 ) THE victim girl was also examined thrice under Section 164, Cr. P. C. The first statement was recorded on 2-8-1993, the second on 21-8-1993 and thereafter lastly on 12-10-1993. The statement under Section 164, cr. P. C. made by her on 2-8-1993 has been marked as Exhibit-C In the said statement, she has given a complete go-bye to the case of the prosecution. There, she has stated that the accused persons were innocent and she had gone to the house of one of her friends. In her second and third statements under Section 164, Cr. P. C. , she has made the statements which fully support the case of the prosecution version. She clearly stated in her subsequent statements under Section 164, Cr. There, she has stated that the accused persons were innocent and she had gone to the house of one of her friends. In her second and third statements under Section 164, Cr. P. C. , she has made the statements which fully support the case of the prosecution version. She clearly stated in her subsequent statements under Section 164, Cr. P. C. that she was brought to deoghar Court and was threatened and under duress, she made statement on 2-8-1993 i. e. the first statement under Section 164, cr. P. C. In paragraph-7 of her cross-examination, the victim girl has stated that at Madhupur, near the quarter of her maternal uncle, the father of the accused had also got his own quarter where Azad Anwar used to live in the said quarter. Though the victim girl has stated that she saw the accused Azad Anwar for the first time in the train and thereafter, in the Court but apparently, from the materials as exhibits 1 and 1/1 (photographs), the said statements of the victim girl appears to be incorrect. In paragraph-11, it has been stated that while those four boys had got her down from the train at Burdwan, they had not gagged her mouth and at that time she did not raise alarm. ( 11 ) P. W.-6 Belarani Ghosh is the informant. She has fully corroborated the prosecution version. ( 12 ) P. W.-8 is the Magistrate who recorded the statements under Section 164, Cr. P. C. of the victim and P. Ws. 9, 10 and 11 are the three doctors who were the members of the medical Board constituted for the examination of the victim girl: P. W.-12 is the investigating Officer who investigated the case. ( 13 ) LEARNED counsel Mr. D. K. Bharati, arguing on behalf of Ranjeet Roy Choudhary has submitted that the victim girl in her statement has clearly admitted that Ranjeet roy Choudhary used to treat her as sister and she also treated him as brother. She further stated that Ranjeet Roy Choudhary did not do anything with her even prior to occurrence or after the occurrence. She did not allege commission of any overt act this appellant and therefore, there is no evidence at all against the appellant Ranjeet Roy choudhary for his involvement in commission of offence under Section 366 Indian Penal Code. She further stated that Ranjeet Roy Choudhary did not do anything with her even prior to occurrence or after the occurrence. She did not allege commission of any overt act this appellant and therefore, there is no evidence at all against the appellant Ranjeet Roy choudhary for his involvement in commission of offence under Section 366 Indian Penal Code. ( 14 ) WHILE arguing on behalf of the appellant Azad Anwar, mr. D. K. Bharati submitted that since the victim girl has changed her statement from one stage to another and therefore, her statement is not believable. It is submitted that in her first statement made under Section 64, Cr. P. C. , she gave a complete different story. In her subsequent statements made under section 164, Cr. P. C. and in her evidence in Court, she has given quite a different story, therefore, in view of her contradictory statements by changing the story from one stage to another, her evidence should be rejected outrightly. ( 15 ) IT was further argued that the victim girl also tried to suppress her relationship with the appellant, who was having love affairs and with consent of the girl, both them got down, at Burdwan Station and then went to Calcutta. ( 16 ) ON behalf of defence, the School leaving Certificate of the victim girl has been proved and marked as Exhibit B in order to show that the girl was major. But, as it appears from the said Exhibit B that the date of birth has been recorded as 7-7-1975 and the date of occurrence is 19-7-1993 and therefore, apparently the age of the girl comes to be less than 18 years, therefore, it appears that she was not major. ( 17 ) THE victim girl in her evidence has clearly stated that Azad Anwar had threatened her to kill and she was forced to get down from the train at Burdwan. She has further stated that Azad Anwar took her to calcutta and kept there in his sisters house for two weeks. ( 18 ) FROM close scrutiny of the entire evidence on record, I find that there is no sufficient evidence against the appellant ranjeet Roy Choudhary for holding him guilty for the offence under Section 366 indian Penal Code with the other accused Azad anwar and therefore, he is entitled to be acquitted from the charge. ( 18 ) FROM close scrutiny of the entire evidence on record, I find that there is no sufficient evidence against the appellant ranjeet Roy Choudhary for holding him guilty for the offence under Section 366 indian Penal Code with the other accused Azad anwar and therefore, he is entitled to be acquitted from the charge. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 1994 (P) is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed against appellant Ranjeet Roy choudhary alias Ranjeet Kumar Choudhary is hereby set aside. He is on bail and therefore, he is discharged from the liability of his bail bonds. ( 19 ) SO far the appellant in Criminal Appeal no. 156 of 1994 (P) namely Azad Anwar is concerned, I find that there is overwhelming evidence against him and the prosecution was able to establish charge against him and therefore, I find that the learned trial court has rightly convicted and sentenced him for the offence under Section 366, Indian Penal Code. In view of my discussions and findings above, the Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1994 (P) filed by Azad Anwar is hereby dismissed and the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court against him is hereby confirmed. Order accordingly. --- *** --- .