SHEIKH SALIM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 11-1-1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in sessions Trial No. 814/91, whereby the appellant-accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) Brief case of the prosecution is as under :-

(3.) Mr. Gaikwad, the learned counsel for the appellant-accused contended that the radiological age of the prosecutrix is 17 years + 1 year. He pointed out that the evidence of Anita (PW 4) shows that the prosecutrix had eloped from home at about 10. 00 p. m. in the night on 4-8-1991 and there is no evidence to show that the accused had taken away the prosecutrix from the lawful guardianship of her father. He contended that anita voluntarily left her home and joined the accused for which the accused is not responsible because it cannot be said that the prosecutrix was under the age of 18 years on the relevant date and time. He also contended that the evidence of the prosecutrix is not consistent with the evidence of Anita, and therefore, the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned additional Sessions Judge cannot be sustained-in-law and the appeal may kindly be allowed.