JUDGMENT The appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 366 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Sessions Case No. 465/2012, vide order dated 10th April, 2013. 2. The charge-sheet was filed after investigation of the F.I.R. lodged by the husband of the victim Mr. Joseph Pawar at Umred Police Station. The complainant was resident of village Udasa. He had lodged report on 12th March, 2010 at Umred Police Station that he had received a phone call from his wife on his mobile number that his wife had been detained at the house of the accused No.4 Ramchandra Meghwal and accused No.5 Devital Meghwal. The victim lady was rescued by the Police from the said house and the first information report for the offence punishable under Section 366 was registered. 3. During the course of investigation, statement of victim lady Smt. Rekha Joseph Pawar was recorded. It appears that victim lady was deserted by her husband and came to stay with her second husband Mr. Joseph Pawar. She had two sons from the earlier wedlock, who were staying at village Nilaj in Bramhapuri Taluka of Chandrapur District. She used to visit Nilaj to meet her sons. She received a phone call from accused No. 1 - Rekhabai Mohurle while she was returning from village Nilaj and therefore, she visited the native place of Rekhabai at Bhiwapur. The accused No. 1 - Rekhabai told the victim (PW1) that she had to undergo some operation and that PW-1 should accompany her to Nagpur. Therefore, PW-1 accompanied the accused No.1 and they reached the house of accused No.3 - Tarabai Pandhare. Thereafter the PW1 was told that there was a marriage of one relative of accused No.1 and 3 and therefore, they had to go out of Nagpur. The operation was postponed because of the said marriage. PW-1 was then taken to Bhopal by accused No.1- Rekhabai and accused No.3 - Tarabai and accused No.2 - Vitthal Harode. She was taken to village Karkariya in District Sasapur of Madhya Pradesh with the help of accused No.4 - Ramchandra Meghwal and accused No.5 - Devilal Meghwal. She was confined in the house of accused nos. 4 and 5 at the said village. She was taken to village Karkariya in District Sasapur of Madhya Pradesh with the help of accused No.4 - Ramchandra Meghwal and accused No.5 - Devilal Meghwal. She was confined in the house of accused nos. 4 and 5 at the said village. It is alleged that accused Rekhabai and Tarabai had taken some money from the accused nos.4 and 5 in consideration of selling PW-1 to accused nos. 4 and 5. It appears from the record that two more accused were arrested in this connection. Their names are Dhula Meghwal and Gokul Meghwal. 4. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that accused nos. 1, 2 and 3 had taken PW-1 to village Karkariya and in furtherance of common intention of all accused, sold PW-1 to accused nos. 4 and 5.As already stated, PW-1 was rescued by the Police and F.I.R was registered. During the course of investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed. 5. It appears from the record that except accused nos. 1, 3 and 5, rests of the accused were not available at the time of committal order. The case of accused nos. 1, 3 and 5 was, therefore, committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 366 read with Section 34 of I.P.C against the accused nos. 1 and 3 and Section 368 read with Section 34 of I.P.C against accused No.5. The accused nos. 1 and 3 are the appellants before this Court. 6. The conviction of the appellants is mainly based on the evidence of PW-1 Smt. Rekha Joseph. PW-2 Joseph Pawar is her husband. PW-3 is a Panch Witness. PW4, PW-5 and PW-6 are the Police Officers who took part in the investigation. 7. As far as PW-2 is concerned, he has stated in his evidence that he had received phone call from PW-I that she had been detained at village Karkariya in Madhya Pradesh. One more person had spoken to PW2 on phone and he told to PW-2 that PW-1 had been sold for Rs. 35,000/- and that he wanted Rs.35,000/- to release PW-1. 8. The story in question is narrated by PW-1. PW-1 has more or less repeated what she has stated in her statement before the Police. I have gone through the evidence of PW-1 in detail. 35,000/- and that he wanted Rs.35,000/- to release PW-1. 8. The story in question is narrated by PW-1. PW-1 has more or less repeated what she has stated in her statement before the Police. I have gone through the evidence of PW-1 in detail. PW-1 has stated that she was taken to village Karkariya by accused nos. 1, 2 and 3 and she was detained at the house of accused nos. 4 and 5. She has attempted to run away, but the villagers did not allow her to go. Ultimately she was given a limited access to a mobile phone from which she had intimated to her husband to come to village Karkariya to take her back. 9. The bare reading of examination-in-chief of PW-1 gives an impression that the evidence is not natural one and she had concocted her own story. It does is not appeal to the reason that such a grown up lady would in the first place abruptly terminate her journey at Armori and go to Bhiwapur instead of coming to her husband's place at, Udasa. Secondly, it does not appeal to the reason that she would readily agree to accompany PW-1 to go to Nagpur without intimating to her husband. What is more surprising is that she was ready to go with the appellants (original accused nos. 1 and 3) to attend the marriage that too without intimating her husband. Above all, what is not acceptable is that, she would travel with them without any resistance from Nagpur to Bhopal and Indore and ultimately at the native place of accused nos. 4 and 5. The evidence of PW-1 does not appear to be natural one and to my mind, it is manufactured evidence only to save her skin from her husband. The incident, in my opinion, may not have occurred in the manner narrated by PW-1. The evidence of PW-1 is highly doubtful and cannot be accepted. The conviction of appellants based on such evidence needs to be set aside. Hence, I pass the following order. 10. The judgment and order dated 10th April, 2014, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-9, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial No.465 of 2012 is set aside. The evidence of PW-1 is highly doubtful and cannot be accepted. The conviction of appellants based on such evidence needs to be set aside. Hence, I pass the following order. 10. The judgment and order dated 10th April, 2014, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-9, Nagpur, in Sessions Trial No.465 of 2012 is set aside. Appellants (Original accused No.1 Smt. Rekhabai Vasanta Mohurle and original accused No.3 – Smt. Tarabai Shyamrao Pandhare) are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 366 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. The appeal stands disposed of. Ordered accordingly.