Z.K.SAIYED J. - (1.)THE present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 07.01.1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, in Sessions Case No. 86 of 1991, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent � accused from the charges levelled against him.
(2.)THE brief facts of the case of prosecution is that on 21.04.1991, the complainant Bai Anju Sodabhai was aged about 8 years and she was residing with her parents at Railway Colony, Hapa area. It is the alleged that on the date of incident, the complainant was sleeping in couch with her parents outside the house. At that time, at late night, the accused kidnapped Bai Anju and took her in the field of Madha Bapa and committed rape on her. Therefore, the complainant lodged complaint against the accused � respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 363, 376, 323, 506(2) of I.P. Code. Thereafter, after investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet against the accused in the Court of learned 3rd Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Clas and Civil Judge (S.D.), Jamnagar.
To prove the case against the present respondent � accused, the prosecution has examined the witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.

At the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and after hearing the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the defence, the learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused of all the charges levelled against him.

(3.)BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the Judgment and order passed by the trial Court the appellant � State has preferred the present appeal.
I have heard learned A.P.P. Ms.H. B. Punani on behalf of the appellant � State. Though served, but no one is present on behalf of the respondent.