JUDGMENT 1. - The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the prosecutrix is an unreliable witness. While the prosecutrix, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has claimed that she had gone to her uncle's house of her own volition and the petitioner did not abduct her, yet after four days of her custody with her father, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has changed the entire story. Even in her testimony, she claimed that she was under duress while she went from one place to another along with the appellant. Surprisingly, she did not raise an alarm while she went through crowded places. Therefore, her conduct is unusual. Thirdly, the learned trial Court has concluded that the prosecutrix was seventeen years and two months old on the date of the incidet. But, in the case of S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942 and in the case of Shyam & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1995 SC 2169 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly observed that in case the prosecutrix happens to be nearing the age of majority, and is mature enough to understand what is good for her, then the offence under Section 366 I.P.C. is not made out. According to the learned counsel, the prosecutrix was, indeed, mature enough to understand the good and bad effect of her action as she was studying in the tenth class. Lastly, the appellant was on bail during trial and he has not violated any of the conditions of the bail. Therefore, his sentence should be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. 2. On the other hand, Mr. Anurag Sharma, the learned counsel for the complainant, has vehemently contended that because of animosity between the familieis, the appellant had abducted the prosecutrix. She was kept under duress and was taken to different places. Therefore the offence under Section 366 I.P.C. is made out. 3. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant. 4. It is, therefore, ordered that the sentence awarded to the accused appellant shall remain suspended till the final decision of the instant appeal and the appellant, Rakesh Koli S/o Shri Kirodi Koli, shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 4. It is, therefore, ordered that the sentence awarded to the accused appellant shall remain suspended till the final decision of the instant appeal and the appellant, Rakesh Koli S/o Shri Kirodi Koli, shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court on 13.1.2011 and as and when called upon to do so.Application allowed. *******