.{1}. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.28 OF 2008 [FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL] IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Versus Pravin Ashok Rakh. ..Respondent. .. Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP, for the Applicant-State. Mr.Vikas Shivarkar, Adv. for the Respondent. .. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned APP for applicant-State and the learned Advocate for respondent-accused. 2. By judgment and order dated 29th September, 2007 passed in Sessions Case No.256 of 2006, the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-2 & Additional Sessions Judge, Pune acquitted the respondent-accused of the offence under Sections 363 & 366 of Indian Penal Code. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of acquittal of .{2}. respondent-accused under Sections 363 & 366 of IPC, the applicant-State has preferred this application for leave to appeal. 4. We have perused the impugned judgment and order as well as the evidence produced by the learned APP. 5. The prosecutrix was below the age of majority. The evidence on record shows that on 27.9.2005 the victim girl left her home to go to school. However, instead of going to school she went with the accused and from there they went to Chinchwad and from there to Lonavala. At Lonavala they stayed at village Aundhe in a rented room as husband and wife for a period of about five months. During that period, both of them worked on a construction site. In the meantime, father of the victim girl on finding her missing and being told that she was last seen in the company of respondent-accused, lodged a complaint against the respondent-accused. 6. After residing at Aundhe, Lonavala for a period of five months, both the victim girl as well as the respondent-accused telephoned their respective .{3}. brothers. From the telephone calls, the victim girl and the respondent-accused came to be traced and they were caught by the police and brought to Pune. 7. There is nothing in the evidence of the victim girl to infer that any inducement was given by respondent-accused or any misrepresentation was made by respondent-accused which caused her to accompany him. Even though the victim girl was not a major, but, she had attained the age of discretion. The evidence on record shows that she has willingly accompanied the accused. There was no threat or inducement on the part of the accused to force her or to compel her to accompany him. The Supreme Court in the case of S.Varadrajan Vs. State of Madras S.Varadrajan Vs. State of Madras S.Varadrajan Vs. State of Madras reported in AIR 1965 SC 942 AIR 1965 SC 942 AIR 1965 SC 942 has observed that, ".. where the minor alleged to have been taken by the accused person left her father’s protection knowing and having capacity to know the full import of what she was doing voluntarily joints the accused person. In such a case we do not think that the accused can be said to have .{4}. taken her away from the keeping of her lawful guardian. Something more has to be shown in a case of this kind and that is some kind of inducement held out by the accused person or an active participation by him in the formation of the intention of the minor to leave the house of the guardian." 8. Looking to the evidence on record in the present case, the respondent-accused by no stretch of imagination can be said to have "taken" the victim girl out of the keeping of her lawful guardianship i.e. father. The fact of the victim girl accompanying the accused all along appears to be out of her own desire to accompany the accused and she stayed with him as his wife. Under these circumstances no inference can be drawn that the respondent-accused is guilty of taking away the victim girl out of the keeping of her father. From the evidence on record, it is clear that the victim girl has willingly accompanied the respondent-accused. The Supreme Court in the case of S.Varadarajan S.Varadarajan S.Varadarajan (supra) has observed that law does not .{5}. cast upon the accused the duty of taking her back to her father’s house or even of telling her not to accompany him. 9. Similar facts arose in the case of Shyam and Shyam and Shyam and another Vs. State of Maharashtra another Vs. State of Maharashtra another Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR AIR AIR 1995 SC 2169 1995 SC 2169 1995 SC 2169. In the said case also the prosecutrix was below the age of majority. The Supreme Court observed that the prosecutrix did not put up any struggle or raise an alarm while being taken away by the accused and the prosecutrix appears to be a willing party to go with the accused on her own. The Supreme Court set-aside the conviction under Section 366 IPC. The Supreme Court further observed that the victim girl has not reached the age of majority, but, she was in the age of discretion, sensible and aware of the intention of the accused. At no point of time she has made any attempt to raise an alarm to put up a struggle or to escape. The Supreme Court further observed that the victim girl was a willing party to go with the accused on her own and in that sense there was no "taking" out of the guardianship of her mother. Observing that the culpability of the accused in these circumstances was not established, .{6}. the Supreme Court acquitted the accused persons of the offence of abduction. 10. The facts in the present case and in the case of Shyam Shyam Shyam (supra) are similar, hence we are of the opinion that the view of acquittal taken by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasonable and possible view. 11. It is well settled that if the view of acquittal could have been reasonably arrived at then mere circumstance that the lower Court would have taken a different view, would be no ground to interfere. In this connection, useful reference can be made to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1 C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1 C.Anthony Vs. K.G.Raghavan Nair, (2003) 1 SCC 1. In the case of C.Anthony C.Anthony C.Anthony(supra), the Supreme Court has observed that unless the findings of the trial Court are perverse or contrary to the material on record, the High Court cannot in Appeal substitute its findings, merely because another contrary opinion was possible on the basis of material on record. As stated earlier, the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasonable and possible view, .{7}. hence, no interference is called for. Application for leave to appeal is rejected. (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)