Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

".......The expression used in Section 361 IPC  is "whoever takes or entices any minor". The  word   "takes"   does   not   necessarily   connote  taking by force and it is not confined only to  ___________________________________________________________________________ State Vs. Sanjay Kumar and Others  use of force, actual or constructive. This word  merely means, "to cause to go", "to escort" or  "to   get   into   possession".   No   doubt   it   does  mean   physical   taking,   but   not   necessarily   by  use of force or fraud. The word "entice" seems  to   involve   the   idea   of   inducement   or  allurement by giving rise to hope or desire in  the other. This can take many forms, difficult  to visualise and describe exhaustively; some of  them may be quite subtle, depending for their  success   on   the   mental   state   of  the   person   at  the time when the inducement is intended to  operate. This may work immediately or it may  create   continuous   and   gradual   but  imperceptible   impression   culminating   after  some time, in achieving its ultimate purposes  of   successful   inducement.   The   two   words  "takes" and "entices", as used in Section 361  IPC   are   in   our   opinion,   intended   to   be   read  together so that each takes to some extent its  colour   and   content   from   the   other.   The  statutory language suggests that if the minor  leaves   her   parental   home   completely  uninfluenced   by   any   promise,   offer   or  inducement   emanating   from   the   guilty   party,  then  the  latter  cannot  be   considered to have  committed   the   offence   as   defined   in   Section  361   IPC.   But   if   the   guilty   party   has   laid   a  foundation   by   inducement,   allurement   or  threat,   etc.   and   if   this   can   be   considered   to  have influenced the minor or weighed with her  in   leaving   her   guardian's   custody   or   keeping  and going to the guilty party, then prima facie  it would be difficult for him to plead innocence  on the ground that the minor had voluntarily  ___________________________________________________________________________ State Vs. Sanjay Kumar and Others  come   to   him.   If   he   had   at   an   earlier   stage  solicited or induced her in any manner to leave  her   father's   protection,   by   conveying   or  indicating   or   encouraging   suggestion   that   he  would   give   her   shelter,   then   the   mere  circumstance   that   his   act   was   not   the  immediate   cause   of   her   leaving   her   parental  home   or   guardian's  custody   would   constitute  no valid defence and would not absolve him.  The question truely falls for determination on  the facts and circumstances of each case......." 

54. PW 10 Preeti had visited Red Fort with Raj, with whom  she had left her house two­three times, before leaving her house.  On 08.04.2013, she also visited Red Fort with him.  Thereafter, on  09.04.2013, she left her house.  Thus, there is no evidence of any  inducement.     In   an   authority   reported   as  State   of   Haryana   Vs.  Raja   Ram   (1973)   1   SCC   544,   while   dealing   with   the   case   of  kidnapping of a minor girl, aged about fourteen years, the Hon'ble  Supreme   Court   explained   the   object   of   Section   361   IPC   in  paragraph 8 as under: