1 A IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.622 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicants V/s. Vilas Dagadu Damble & Ors. ..Respondents Mrs.M.M.Mhatre, A.P.P.for the Applicant-State. None for the Respondents. CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : JUNE 9TH,2009. P.C. Heard learned A.P.P. Smt.Mhatre for the State. 2. It is the leave petition to file an appeal against the acquittal of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. By Judgment and order dated 15th November, 2008, all the three accused 2 Respondents were acquitted for the offence punishable under section 366 and 366-A read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved by said acquittal, State has preferred present application for leave. 3. Perused the leave application and accompanied documents. Also perused the notes of evidence of six prosecution witnesses which are produced alongwith the application. Specific contentions of notes of evidence of P.W.1 the mother of prosecutorix and P.W.No.2 the prosecutorix girl are perused with care and scrutinized in order to ascertain whether there is anything to come to the different conclusion then that arrived at by the Sessions Court. Allegedly, it appears to be the case of kidnapping of a minor girl of 17 years from the lawful guardianship of her parents by accused No.1 by taking her on his motor cycle. Allegedly said incident was seen by P.W.Nos.3, 4 and 5 who were then working in the nearby fields. Their evidence goes to show that there was no any attempt on the part of the prosecutorix to raise any shouts or to call for help or to obstruct accused No.1 from taking her away on motor cycle. It is also a factual 3 position that immediately said witnesses did not disclose such incident of taking away to P.W.No.1 to the mother of the prosecutorix, presumably on the premise that there was no any shouts or objections on the part of the prosecutorix while she was being taken away. It appears that said factual position was weighted with the trial Sessions Court resulting in the acquittal of the accused. 4. Considering the effect of substantive evidence of the prosecution witnesses as mentioned above, in the opinion of this Court, there is nothing to allow the present leave petition so as to test the impugned Judgment in the Appeal. Hence, the present application for leave is dismissed and accordingly disposed of. (A.R. JOSHI, J.)