Six acquitted in kidnapping case as court finds minor girl, nearing adulthood, married willingly

New Delhi: A Delhi court has acquitted six people accused of kidnapping and forcing a minor girl into marriage, holding that the prosecution failed to prove that the girl was taken away from lawful guardianship or was compelled to marry against her will.

Additional Sessions Judge Joginder Prakash Nahar gave the benefit of doubt to all the accused -- Mohammad Naeem, Mohammad Farman, Mumtaz Ahmed, Suhail, Javed Iqbal and Sayyed Madassar Hussain -- and acquitted them of all charges under Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (abduction for marriage) and 368 (wrongful confinement) of the IPC.

The court noted that while documentary evidence indicated the girl was a minor at the time of the incident, her testimony did not support the prosecution's case of kidnapping or coercion.

"It is held that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused person had forced or compelled by deceitful means induced PW-5 (minor girl) to leave her home. Prosecution also has failed to prove that the accused persons had kidnapped/abducted PW-5 to compel her marriage with accused no. 2 Mohd Farman against her will.

"Hence, it is held that prosecution has failed to prove that the offence under Section 366 IPC was committed by all the accused persons," the court said in a judgment dated March 10.

According to the prosecution, the girl, aged 17-and-a-half years, went missing from her house on the night of October 8, 2015, and her father later alleged that she had been kidnapped by the accused, who intended to marry her to one of them.

Three months before the incident, accused Farman's sister, who was also an aunt of the affected minor girl, had asked her mother to marry her to Farman as he liked her a lot. However, her mother turned down the offer.

Later, after the incident, when the minor girl's father asked Naeem, Farman's father, about her whereabouts, he said they were now married and he would arrange a meeting with them soon. However, despite repeated requests, the girl's parents were left in the dark about her whereabouts.

During the trial, both the girl and her parents turned hostile. The girl told the court that she had left home voluntarily after being scolded by her parents and had married the accused of her own accord.

"No one had enticed her and no one had forced her to perform nikah with accused no. 2 Mohd Farman," the court recorded, noting that she returned home on her own the next day.

The judge observed that merely because the girl was a minor, it was still necessary for the prosecution to prove that the accused had "taken" or "enticed" her away from her lawful guardian.

"It appears that in place of taking away of PW-5 (minor girl) by the accused person, PW-5 had proceeded to the company of the accused person. She has left the protection of her father knowing and having capacity," the court said, adding that she was "on the verge of attaining majority" at 17-and-a-half years of age and capable of understanding her actions.

"There is not even a word in the deposition of PW-5 from which inference could be drawn that PW-5 had left her house at the instance of accused no. 2 Mohd Farman. She had attained the age of discretion and she was on the verge of attaining majority.

"No threats were extended to her by the accused person. She had willingly accompanied the accused," the court said, adding that she was not a child of tender years unable to think for herself and she was on the verge of attaining majority who was capable of knowing what was good and what was bad for her.

Relying on legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the court emphasised the distinction between "taking" and a minor voluntarily accompanying someone.

The court also flagged several inconsistencies and gaps in the prosecution's case, including the delay in lodging the FIR, contradictions regarding the place of recovery and failure to examine key witnesses.

It further noted that the statement of the minor girl recorded before a magistrate could not be relied upon in the absence of consistent testimony in court, especially after she turned hostile.

"Court has to be slow to act on testimony of a hostile witness when she has no regard for truth," it said.

Finding no evidence of force, coercion or deceit, the court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt and thus, the court acquitted all six persons.