Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 724 OF 2006 Against the judgment and order dated 11.07.2006 passed by Sri Rabindra Mani Tripathi, Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-V, Darbhanga in S.Tr. No. 336/2004. ************ Md. Nasim, S/o Md. Irshad, resident of Village-Sheikh Basiach, P.S.-Pipradhi, District-Sheohar. ……(Appellant) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR-------(Opposite Party) ************* For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Narain, Adv. : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Das, Adv. For the State : Mr. R.B. Roy “Raman”, APP. ************** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The appellant has been convicted under Section 363A IPC and sentenced to RI for ten years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- in absence of which a further period of six months RI by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-V, Darbhanga in S.Tr. No. 336/2004 by a judgment dated 11.07.2006. 2. The case of the prosecution according to P.W. 4, Ganesh Paswan is that on 08.09.2004 the appellant was caught along with a child of about two and half years and variously assaulted and taken to the police station where he disclosed that in fact he had kidnapped the boy for selling his kidney. 3. During trial the prosecution in all examined seven witnesses out of whom P.W. 6 is a formal witness. P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 have been declared hostile. P.W. 4 is the 2 informant. P.W. 5 is the grand-mother of the kidnapped child and P.W. 6 is the Investigating Officer. 4. From the evidence of P.W. 5 the grand mother it appears that she has only supported the fact that the victim had gone missing but she did not identify the appellant as the person who had taken away the child. P.W. 4 the informant has categorically stated that the appellant had given the so-called confession while at the police station which would make the confession inadmissible in law. P.W. 6 is the Investigating Officer who is also on the point of confession of the appellant at the police station further confirming the inadmissibility of the confession. In the result, the Court is left only with the evidence that the appellant had been found in the company of the alleged victim which by itself would not constitute any offence whatsoever. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 11.07.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-V, Darbhanga in S.Tr. No. 336/2004 is, hereby, set aside. The appellant shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 27th June, 2011. NAFR/Vikash/-