The Allahabad High Court has recently quashed a kidnapping case against a man, asserting that merely talking to a minor does not constitute "enticing her away from lawful guardianship". Justice Vikram D. Chauhan presided over the case, emphasizing that if a minor voluntarily leaves their guardian without any coercion or enticement, Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), related to kidnapping from lawful guardianship, would not be applicable.

The case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) lodged in December 2020, where a complainant alleged that the accused had enticed away his 16-year-old niece. However, during the investigation, the girl stated that she left her house due to being beaten and subjected to electric shocks by her family members. She also mentioned that her uncle physically abused her for talking to the accused on the phone.

In her statements before the police and the trial court, the victim stated that she went to Siwan and stayed there for two days before being taken to the police station. Notably, she did not mention the accused's name or involvement in her decision to leave home. While her mother referenced her daughter's relationship with the accused, the girl did not directly claim that she eloped with him.

Based on these facts, the accused petitioned the High Court to quash the chargesheet and criminal proceedings, arguing that the essential ingredients of kidnapping were not met. The court observed that the prosecution had failed to demonstrate how the victim was enticed away by the applicant. The court noted that merely talking to the victim could not be considered as enticing her away. The bench opined that the statements of the informant and the victim's mother contained only suspicion and did not disclose particulars as to how the victim had been enticed away.

Justice Chauhan, in his order dated September 10, allowed the application filed by the accused, Himanshu Dubey, and quashed the chargesheet, cognizance order, and the entire criminal proceedings. The High Court clarified that the offense of kidnapping requires clear evidence of enticement or inducement by the accused. Casual communication or acquaintance, by itself, cannot be treated as abduction. The court stated that the prosecution had not disclosed the material particulars and circumstances regarding the enticement of the victim by the accused.

The High Court reiterated that where a minor voluntarily and on their own accord leaves lawful guardianship, the provisions of Section 361 IPC would not apply. The court emphasized that the victim left her home because of the harassment she faced from her family members and not because of any inducement by the accused. The court added that the cognizance order also did not disclose the material circumstances that were before the trial court.