Voluntary elopement and consensual relations by a major victim negate charges of kidnapping and rape.

The appellant was convicted by the trial court under Sections 366 and 376 of the IPC for the alleged kidnapping and rape of a victim whose mother (PW-1) initially reported her missing as a minor (aged 16 years and 9 months) in October 2021

The victim (PW-2) was recovered from the appellant’s possession in April 2022

Medical examinations found no internal or external injuries, and FSL reports showed no presence of semen or sperms on seized articles

Although the prosecution alleged she was a minor, the trial court determined based on oral evidence that the victim was a major (over 18 years old) at the time of the incident

The victim testified that the appellant allured her with marriage and took her to Faizabad (UP), where they lived as husband and wife for several months

The appellant challenged the conviction, asserting the relationship was consensual

1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was kidnapped or abducted for the purpose of marriage

2. Whether the sexual intercourse was committed against the victim's will or without her consent, particularly given her status as a major

3. Whether the testimony of the prosecutrix qualifies as that of a "sterling witness" to sustain a conviction without corroboration

Sections 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) regarding kidnapping for marriage and rape.

The "sterling witness" doctrine established in Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2020), which mandates that a witness's version must be of very high quality, consistent, and unassailable to be accepted at face value without hesitation

The Court cited Dola @ Dolagobinda Pradhan v. State of Odisha (2018) and Raju v. State of M.P., emphasizing that while a prosecutrix's testimony is generally reliable, it must be worthy of credence and protected against the possibility of false implication

Section 481 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding bail pending potential appeals

The Court found that since the victim was a major, the element of consent was pivotal.

The Court noted that the victim traveled long distances via motorcycle, bus, and train to Faizabad but never raised an alarm or complained to fellow passengers or persons in the vicinity

This conduct strongly suggested she was a consenting party who eloped of her own will

Applying the "sterling witness" test from Santosh Prasad, the Court observed that her testimony lacked the necessary quality and consistency, as there was no evidence of force, protest, or confinement

The absence of physical injuries or scientific evidence (FSL) of sexual intercourse further weakened the prosecution's claim of forcible rape

The Court concluded that a major girl accompanying a man for months without protest cannot be said to have been kidnapped or raped

The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of kidnapping and rape beyond reasonable doubt, as the evidence indicated a consensual relationship between two adults

The appellant was acquitted of all charges and ordered to be released forthwith

Pursuant to Section 481 of the BNSS, 2023, the appellant was directed to furnish a personal bond to ensure appearance should a special leave petition be filed