MD. MOIN ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Learned Counsel for the State on the matter of bail. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that it is the case of the prosecution itself that it were co -convicts, Aarti Devi and Rita Devi who represented to the victim lady that she will be having a good earning, if she does a job of maid -servant at Delhi. On such inducement, she came to Railway Station at Ranchi where this appellant and other co -convicts accompanied her and then took her to Delhi from where she was taken to Saharanpur where they met with one Bijay Kumar @ Bijay Kumar Singh who has been alleged to have married that girl. On such accusation, the appellant was convicted for an offence under Sections 363, 366A of the Indian Penal Code though it has come during evidence that the girl was never a minor girl rather she was aged about 21 years on the date of occurrence and hence, any conviction under Section 366A recorded against the appellant is bad.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel further submits that conviction under Section 363 of the I.P.C. is also bad on account of the fact that the appellant has never been alleged to have done any overt act in the commission of the offence of kidnapping. The appellant has never been alleged to have used force or did anything in enticing away the girl. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances, the appellant, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/ - (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in connection with S.T. Case No. 63 of 2010.