ANIRUDHA RADHESHYAM YADAV Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) In the case of S. Varadarajan vs. State of Madras AIR 1965 942. The Apex Court has held thus : "Where a minor girl alleged to be taken away by the accused person, had left her father's protection knowing and having capacity to know the full import of what she was doing and voluntarily joined the accused, it could not be said that the accused had taken her away from the keeping of her lawful guardian within the meaning of section 361 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC" for short). Something more had to be done in a case of that kind, such as an inducement held out by the accused person or an active participation by him in the formation of the intention either immediately prior to the minor leaving her father protection or at some earlier stage."

(3.) In the case in hand, the victim was 14 years and 11 months old on the date of incident; whereas the applicant was 25 years old. It appears from the victim's statement that, on 18.04.2019 at 01:00 am., she had left her parents' house secretly with her belongings to go to the accused and thereafter, they had traveled from one place to another, right from Mahableshwar to Bhusawal and thereafter to Delhi. Her statement shows that on 22.04.2019, she left with the complainant for two days, to go to Gajipur, UP, the village of the applicant, where she was persuaded by the relative of the applicant to return back to home and thereafter, both had returned to Mumbai. The said description of facts do not even remotely suggest that the applicant had ever induced and/or forced the victim to leave her parents' house. Thus, prima facie, the ratio laid down in the S. Varadarajan's case (supra) is applicable to the case in hand.