An accused’s failure to explain a victim’s fate after taking him away supports conviction under Section 365 IPC.

The informant alleged that on the night of 5 August 2006, his son, Tinku, left home after saying that the petitioner had called him and was waiting in a car. Tinku did not return. A Sanha was recorded on 17 August 2006, followed by registration of a case under Section 365 IPC.

After trial, the J.M. First Class convicted the petitioner under Section 365 IPC and sentenced him to two years and eleven months’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000; the Sessions Judge dismissed his appeal and upheld the conviction.

The petitioner challenged the concurrent findings in revision, raising, among other matters, delay in instituting the FIR, non-examination of the investigating officer, and the absence of independent or eyewitness testimony.

Whether the concurrent findings of conviction and sentence under Section 365 IPC disclosed an error of law warranting interference in revision.

The court considered Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code, under which the petitioner had been convicted, and Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.

It relied on the principle that where a relevant fact is especially within an accused’s knowledge, the absence of an explanation may be considered with the other evidence.

The court found that the prosecution evidence showed the petitioner took Tinku away in a car and that Tinku did not return; it also noted testimony concerning a financial dispute between them.

The court further treated the defence witness’s evidence as admitting that Tinku had gone with the petitioner and had not returned.

In the court’s view, the petitioner offered no explanation as to what happened while Tinku was with him, a circumstance it considered under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.

It rejected the petitioner’s challenges and found no basis to disturb the concurrent findings.

It cancelled the petitioner’s bail and directed him to surrender before the trial court within two months to serve the remaining sentence, failing which coercive steps could be taken.