D.N.PRASAD, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Palamau in S.T. No. 31 of 1983, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge convicted the sole appellant for the offence under Sec. 363 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief as stated that the Informant submitted a written report alleging therein that the appellant, Md. Reyasat was an employee in the shop of the Informant and at time, he used to stay in the house of the Informant. But, on account of certain reason, he was removed from service on 13.7.1980. Thereafter, the appellant was doing service in the shop of one Gulam Rasool. It is further alleged that from. 20.7.1980 at about 5 a.m., his daughter aged about 14 years had gone to church for prayer but did not return home. His son started searching for his daughter Albina but she could not be traced and on 23.7.1980, he came to know from one Manual Oraon that Albina was seen with the appellant at Daltonganj Court. Thereafter, Pitar Munjant went to Daltonganj to search out his sister and she was traced there and accordingly, F.I.R. was lodged for the offence under Secs. 363 and 366, I.P.C. The police investigated the case and submitted charge -sheet against the appellant. The charge was framed under Sec. 366A, I.P.C. against the appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty.
(3.) THE witnesses were examined in the Court below. After considering the evidence on record, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant, in the manner, as stated above. Not being satisfied with the judgment of conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred this appeal alleging therein that the learned trial Court has committed error in convicting the appellant, as the victim girl, Albina Munjani was quite major at the relevant time and he has accompanied the appellant with her consent and so the question of kidnapping does not arise. It is also stated that the Investigating Officer has not been examined in the case due to which the case of the appellant is highly prejudiced as well as one of the friends who was present with the victim Albina Munjani has also not been examined to substantiate the story of kidnapping in the manner as alleged. Thus, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, is fit to be set aside.;