Kolkata: Observing that the age of a victim is the rudimentary and cardinal element to be determined in indicting a person in offences such as kidnapping, Calcutta High Court acquitted two persons in a case where two girls were reported missing in 2013.
The bench of Justice Ananya Bandopadhyay was moved by the two accused (appellants) challenging their conviction by the trial court under Section 363 IPC (kidnapping).
A complaint was lodged by the father of one of the girls alleging that his minor daughter and the minor daughter of another person went missing on January 25, 2013. The complainant claimed the girls were enticed by the accused persons with promises of jobs in Delhi and were apprehended at a bus-stand on January 26 while attempting to board the bus.
The appellants’ counsel submitted lack of independent witnesses to prove recovery, inconsistencies in prosecution’s evidence regarding place and time of recovery, failure to establish victims’ minority or forcible confinement and that the victims left home voluntarily without enticement.
The court observed that the prosecution relied on seizure lists to establish victims’ age (14 and 15). However, the original birth certificates were not produced in court, diminishing their probative value. No corroborative evidence (e.g school records) was presented to confirm the victims’ minority, a critical element for Section 363 IPC. Witnesses who signed seizure lists provided vague or contradictory testimony about the documents’ details.
The court noted that the victims testified they voluntarily left home to meet one of the accused for job opportunities in Delhi. They didn’t tell the investigating officer (IO) that they were forcibly confined or enticed and failed to narrate key details which discredited claims of kidnapping.
The IO failed to verify bus details and never clarified the place of recovery. No immediate action was taken by the fathers after their daughters went missing.