JUDGMENT : By judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2009 and 03.02.2009 respectively passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.8, Purnea, in Sessions Case No.23 of 2003/Tr. No.106 of 2008 arising out of Kasba P.S. Case No. 181 of 2002, the sole Appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 366-A/511, 455, 452 and 341 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years for the offence under Sections 366-A/511 Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Sections 455 Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for four years for the offence under Sections 452 Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days for the offence under Sections 341 Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Appellant was always threatening the Informant to solemnize marriage of his daughter with him. He had written several letters to his daughter. His daughter was taking tuition from one teacher, who was also threatened not to teach the Informant’s daughter. His father and mother were also adamant for altercation with the Informant. On 03.10.2002, at about 11.30 PM, the Informant along with his family members were sleeping in the house. Suddenly, daughter of the Informant started crying Bachao-Bachao. Thereafter, inmates of house got awake and saw Appellant and Mahboob had caught hold Ismat Jahan. They were taking her outside the house. Muzaffar had closed her mouth. The Informant raised alarm upon which neighbours came and rescued the daughter of the Informant. In the meantime, Margub Alam, Quasim and Tahir came and rescued the accused persons on the point of. 303. 3. The prosecution has examined ten witnesses in the case. Md. Ziyaur Rahman (PW 10) is the informant of this case. Ismat Jahan (PW 6) is daughter of the Informant (victim). These two witnesses are the most important witnesses in the case. They are only eye witnesses to the occurrence according to First Information Report. 4. Md. Ziyaur Rahman (PW 10) has stated in his evidence that on the date of occurrence, he was sleeping in the Verandah of his house. Other family members were sleeping inside the house. His daughter, Ismat Jahan, was sleeping inside the house. She was making preparation for matriculation examination. She was aged about 13-14 years. 4. Md. Ziyaur Rahman (PW 10) has stated in his evidence that on the date of occurrence, he was sleeping in the Verandah of his house. Other family members were sleeping inside the house. His daughter, Ismat Jahan, was sleeping inside the house. She was making preparation for matriculation examination. She was aged about 13-14 years. This witness suddenly got awake on the noise of his daughter Bachao-Bachao. Other inmates of the house also got awake. This witness went inside the house and saw Mahboob and this Appellant had caught hold her daughter and were taking her outside the house. She raised alarm then several persons assembled and rescued his daughter. Muzaffar (Appellant) fled away and Mahboob was caught. It is further alleged that Tahir, uncle of Mahboob and Quasim, father of Mahboob came armed with. 303 and took away Mahboob from the clutch of the Informant and other persons. Thereafter, Informant lodged case in the Police Station. He has further stated that prior to the occurrence at the time of going school, his daughter, Ismat Jahan, was threatened by the accused persons. Thereafter, the Informant discontinued her tuition. 5. In cross-examination, this witness has stated that his daughter was not kidnapped. As per written report, only attempt of kidnapping was made. In para 10 of his cross-examination, this witness has stated that one case under Section 307 Indian Penal Code, was filed against him and his son by Muzaffar. Brother of the Informant was also accused in that case. One case under Section 302 Indian Penal Code was also filed. In that case, Muzaffar and Tanwir were accused. As such, from the suggestion, it appears that there is enmity between the parties due to filing of criminal cases. 6. The victim, Ismat Jahan, (PW 6) has stated that she was studying in room. She was sleeping after study. Lantern was burning. Her father was sleeping in Verandah. In the next room, her Bhaiya and Bhabhi were sleeping. In the same room, her Nani was also sleeping. She got awake when she felt someone is dragging her. She identified him as Mahboob. Her face was covered with Chadar. She identified Mahboob and Muzaffar. She raised alarm. Her father and other inmates of the house reached. Muzaffar fled away and Mahboob was caught. After 10-15 minutes, uncle and father of Muzaffar came armed with. 303 and got Mahboob rescued. She identified him as Mahboob. Her face was covered with Chadar. She identified Mahboob and Muzaffar. She raised alarm. Her father and other inmates of the house reached. Muzaffar fled away and Mahboob was caught. After 10-15 minutes, uncle and father of Muzaffar came armed with. 303 and got Mahboob rescued. Muzaffar and Mahboob used to abuse her when she return from school. In cross-examination, this witness has stated in para 7 that Mahboob brought her in his lap and Muzaffar (Appellant) covered her face. She did not raise halla. They brought her to Angan. There was no light in Angan. She got awake when he put her in his lap. Her father, mother arrived. Muzaffar fled away, but Mahboob was caught. 7. Md. Mansoor Alam has been examined as PW 1. He has stated that he reached on halla in the house of Ziaur Rahman at about 11.00 PM. Altercation was taking place between Ziaur Rahman and Mahboob. Ziaur Rahman had caught hold Mahboob. He heard that Muzaffar has managed to run away. 8. Monazir Ali @ Majir Ali (PW 2) has also stated that he was sleeping in his Angan. He heard halla and got awake. Halla was coming from the house of Ziaur Rahman. He went to the house of Ziaur Rahman. Ziaur Rahman told him that Mahboob and Muzaffar have entered into his house to kidnap his daughter, Ismat Jahan. Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. In cross-examination, he has stated that he has given statement on the basis of hearsay. 9. Md. Mushtaque (PW 3) has stated that on hearing halla from the house of Ziaur Rahman, he got awake. In the light of torch, he went to the house of Ziaur Rahman. Ziaur Rahman told that Mahboob and Muzaffar have attempted to kidnap his daughter. Quasim, who is father of Mahboob, along with Tahir forcibly got Mahboob rescued. 10. Md. Kalim (PW 4) has stated that halla was coming from the house of Ziaur Rahman. He went there and heard that Muzaffar and Mahboob had attempted to kidnap his daughter. Mahboob was caught, but he was rescued by his family members. This witness has been declared hostile. 11. Md. Imtiyaz (PW 5) is brother of the victim. 10. Md. Kalim (PW 4) has stated that halla was coming from the house of Ziaur Rahman. He went there and heard that Muzaffar and Mahboob had attempted to kidnap his daughter. Mahboob was caught, but he was rescued by his family members. This witness has been declared hostile. 11. Md. Imtiyaz (PW 5) is brother of the victim. He has stated that on the date of occurrence at about 11.30 PM in the night Muzaffar and Mahboob came to his house, caught hold his sister, Ismat Jahan. They were taking her out of the house. He along with other family members arrived on cry of Ismat. Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. Thereafter, father and other relative of Mahboob came and rescued Mahboob on the point of. 303. Thereafter, case was lodged by his father. 12. Bibi Marguba Khatoon (PW 7) has stated that Ismat is her Nanad. She was sleeping in the house at about 11.30 PM. She heard cry of Ismat. She came out of the room in torch light and saw Muzaffar and Mahboob were taking Ismat outside the house. Mahboob was caught hold. Muzaffar fled away. Quasim, Tahir etc. came from the house of Mahboob and got him rescued on the point of .303 13. Bibi Madina Khatoon (PW 8) has stated that she was sleeping in a room of her house. Ismat was sleeping in another room. She got awake on cry of Ismat. She saw Mahboob and Muzaffar were taking away Ismat. Muzaffar fled away. Mahboob was caught. After ten minutes, other relatives of Mahboob came and got him rescued from the informant. In para 7 of her cross-examination, this witness has stated that after arrival of the villagers, Muzaffar fled away. 14. Md. Sirajuddin (PW 9) stated that Ziaur Rahman told him that two persons were dragging her daughter from the house. They were Muzaffar and Mahboob. Mahboob was caught. He was rescued by his family members. 15. The defence has examined three witnesses in the case. 16. DW 1, Md. Tahir Alam, has stated that he used to teach Ismat, daughter of Ziaur Rahman, since 2003. She was student of Class X at that time. Muzaffar Hussain is a good farmer in the village. He had never threatened him not to teach Ismat. He had no knowledge about the occurrence. 17. 16. DW 1, Md. Tahir Alam, has stated that he used to teach Ismat, daughter of Ziaur Rahman, since 2003. She was student of Class X at that time. Muzaffar Hussain is a good farmer in the village. He had never threatened him not to teach Ismat. He had no knowledge about the occurrence. 17. Sheikh Tajammul (DW 2) has stated that Muzaffar Hussain is a good farmer. He has not heard in the village about the occurrence. 18. Md. Afaque Alam (DW 3) has stated that Sahina Perveen is his niece. She has been married with Muzaffar. 19. In this manner, from perusal of entire evidence, it appears that prosecution has tried to produce Ziaur Rahman (PW 10), Md. Imtiyaz (PW 5), Ismat Jahan, (PW 6), Bibi Marguba Khatoon (PW 7), Bibi Madina Khatoon (PW 8) as eye witnesses. All these witnesses have stated that they arrived on halla. Mahboob was caught on the spot and Muzaffar managed to run away. 20. Ismat Jahan (PW 6), victim girl, has stated in her evidence that while she was sleeping she felt that somebody is dragging her after covering her face. Chadar was pressed by the leg of Mahboob and, thereafter, her face got uncovered and she identified and raised halla then Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. Some other family members of the victim, namely, Md. Imtiyaz, PW 5 (brother), Bibi Marguba Khatoon, PW 7 (Bhabhi), Bibi Madina Khatoon, PW 8 (Mother) have stated that they got awake on hearing cry of Ismat. Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. Other witnesses, namely, Md. Mansoor Alam (PW 1), Monazir Ali @ Majir Ali (PW 2), Md. Mushtaque (PW 3), Md. Kalim (PW 4), Md. Sirajuddin (PW 9) are hearsay witnesses, who have stated that they learnt about the occurrence from Ziaur Rahman. 21. In such circumstances, none of the witness has seen this Appellant dragging the daughter of the Informant. Ismat Jahan, (PW 6), the victim girl, has herself stated in her evidence that Chadar was pressed with leg of Mahboob due to which her face got uncovered. She identified and raised halla. Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. In para 7 of her cross-examination, she has stated that Mahboob had taken her in his lap and Muzaffar had covered her face. She identified and raised halla. Mahboob was caught and Muzaffar managed to run away. In para 7 of her cross-examination, she has stated that Mahboob had taken her in his lap and Muzaffar had covered her face. The father of victim Ziaur Rahman has stated in para 1 of his cross-examination that his daughter was not kidnapped. 22. Therefore, there is no cogent and reliable evidence against the Appellant to prove his guilt beyond all reasonable doubts. The Trial Court has committed illegality in passing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the Appellant for the offence under Sections 366-A/511, 455, 452 and 341 Indian Penal Code. 23. In view of such, impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.01.2009 and 03.02.2009 respectively passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.8, Purnea, in Sessions Case No.23 of 2003/Tr. No.106 of 2008 arising out of Kasba P.S. Case No. 181 of 2002, is hereby set aside. 24. The Appellant is acquitted of the charges levelled against him. He is discharged from the liabilities of his bail bond. 25. This Criminal Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.