Md. Nasib Ali @ Nasim AlamversusThe State Of Bihar

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.15 of 2016
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2009 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Md. Nasib Ali @ Nasim Alam S/o Shek Adalat, Resident of village- Shankar
Saraiya Tola Munsi Inar, P.S.- Turkaulia, District- East Champaran at
Motihari
                                                        ... ... Appellant/s
                               Versus
The State of Bihar
                                                     ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s     :       Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s    :       Mrs. Abha Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
 Date : 13-05-2026

             1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant

 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

 State.

             2. This memo of appeal has been filed challenging the

 judgment of conviction dated 04.12.2015 and order of sentence

 dated 08.12.2015 passed by the learned Additional District and

 Sessions Judge-VIII, East Champaran, Motihari in Sessions

 Trial No. 101 of 2010 arising out of Turkaulia P.S. Case No. 63

 of 2009 whereby and whereunder appellant was held guilty for

 the offences under Sections 361/363 of the Indian Penal Code

 and accordingly, learned Trial Court convicted appellant and

 sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for seven years for the

 offence under Section 363 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-

 in default whereof, he was further sentenced to undergo rigorous
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.15 of 2016 dt.13-05-2026
                                             2/4




         imprisonment of four months.

                      3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 06.04.2009

         at about 9 AM, co-accused Mohammad Salim, who used to give

         tuition to grand-daughter of the informant, took her to school

         but she did not return by 4 PM. Informant went to the house of

         co-accused Mohammad Salim several times to inquire about it

         but his family members kept saying that she would return soon.

         Informant alleges that co-accused Md. Salim along with this

         appellant kidnapped his grand-daughter on a motorcycle bearing

         registration no. BR05D9171 for the purpose of human

         trafficking.

                      4. During investigation, victim was recovered and in

         her statement, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit-A)

         on 17.08.2013, before the Judicial Magistrate, who stated that

         she was in love with Md. Salim and voluntarily ran off with

         him. She stated her age to be about 23 years and no one had

         kidnapped her.

                      5. During trial, the prosecution has examined as may

         as nine witnesses out of whom, P.W. 1 to P.W. 4 claimed to be

         eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 5, P.W. 6, P.W. 7, who is

         mother of the victim and P.W. 8 are hearsay witnesses. P.W. 9 is

         the informant who supported the prosecution case and stated
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.15 of 2016 dt.13-05-2026
                                             3/4




         that on returning home he learnt that the accused Md. Salim and

         this appellant had taken away his granddaughter on a

         motorcycle. The victim and the Investigating Officer have not

         been examined by the prosecution during trial and therefore, the

         Court is bereft of all objective evidence, which would have been

         required to prove the place of occurrence as well as manner of

         occurrence.

                      6. On the other hand, defence relied upon Exhibit A

         and submitted that the victim was major at the time of

         occurrence and was a consenting party.

                      7. In this case, the victim, who is alleged to have been

         kidnapped by the accused persons was neither examined by the

         prosecution nor supported the prosecution case in her statement

         recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Exhibit A). Investigating

         Officer who investigated the case has also not been examined.

         Thus, in absence of these two vital pieces of evidence, this

         Court finds it unsafe to rely on the evidences of other witnesses.

                      8. In the result, the impugned judgment of conviction

         dated 04.12.2015 and order of sentence dated 08.12.2015 passed

         by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VIII, East

         Champaran, Motihari in Sessions Trial No. 101 of 2010 arising

         out of Turkaulia P.S. Case No. 63 of 2009 are hereby set aside
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.15 of 2016 dt.13-05-2026
                                                          4/4




                      with respect to the appellant.

                                   9. Appellant, above named, is acquitted of all the

                      charges and is discharged from the liability of the bail bond in

                      connection with this case.

                                   10. Accordingly, this appeal stands allowed.

                                   11. Interlocutory application/s, if any, also stands

                      disposed off.




                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          15.05.2026
Transmission Date       15.05.2026