VICKY RAM @ VIKKY KUMAR v. CHAMPARAN

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH Mr.Anant Kumar Mishra Mr.A.G ORAL ORDER 3 17-01-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable u/s 363, 366(A), 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 8 of the POCSO Act. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co- accused persons kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

Learned Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48606 of 2022(3) dt.17-01-2023 counsel further submitted that as per medical board, the age of victim is in between 18 to 19 years and the victim was a major at the time of occurrence and no case under Section 366A is made out against the petitioner. Learned Counsel has further submitted that the ingredients of section 366A are not fulfilled in this case as there is no allegation of forcing or seducing the victim to have illicit intercourse with another person. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sat Prakash vs. State of Haryana Cr. App. No. 1163 of 2011 in which it has been held that “A perusal of the aforesaid section reveals, that the inducing of the minor to constitute an offence under Section 366A, should have been with reference to an intent to force or seduce her “... to illicit intercourse with another person...”.