Jharkhand HC Acquits Man Of Section 366 Charge, Finding Adult Woman’s Force Allegations Were Material Improvements On Her Earlier Voluntary Account

The appellant was prosecuted after the informant alleged that his daughter had been taken away by the appellant.

The victim’s age was disputed; the prosecution led no authenticated evidence establishing her age, while the victim’s brother testified that she was about 20–21 years old and had left voluntarily.

The trial court acquitted the appellant of offences under Sections 363 and 366A IPC but convicted him under Section 366 IPC and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine.

The appellant appealed, contending that the victim was an adult, had accompanied him voluntarily, and that the evidence did not establish an offence under Section 366 IPC.

The court considered Sections 363, 366A and 366 IPC, under which the appellant had been charged or convicted.

Section 366 IPC concerns kidnapping or abduction of a woman with the requisite intent, including to compel or induce her marriage against her will or to force or seduce her to illicit intercourse.

The court’s decision turned on whether the evidence established the elements of that offence; it cited no precedent in support of its reasoning.

The court found no reliable evidence proving that the victim was a minor and relied on the victim’s brother’s testimony that she was an adult and had left voluntarily.

It considered the victim’s trial account of being forcibly taken and sexually assaulted to be materially inconsistent with her earlier statement under Section 164 CrPC, in which she had stated that she went voluntarily and that there was a love affair.

The court also considered her travel with the appellant without raising an alarm as supporting voluntariness, and concluded that the prosecution had not proved the ingredients of Section 366 IPC.

As the appellant was on bail, he was discharged from his bail-bond liability.