the panchnama regarding any of the witnesses having divulged that the child victim had been seen in the company of the accused appellant. This is a significant loophole and a grave shortcoming in the prosecution case. It may be stated that the 1st Investigating Officer (PW-16) did not make any effort to make an enquiry from Premshankar Jayshankar Gupta, Raju Pukraj Choudhari and Jaybhim Channappa Kamble, either on 30th September 2013 or 1st October 2013. In the natural course of events, these persons would have been the first in the line of sight of the Investigating Officer (PW-16) to unfurl the sequence of events and to take leads about the child victim’s whereabouts. Had there been any sincerity in the 1st Investigating Officer’s actions, he would have immediately ventured to make a thorough investigation into the persons whose names surfaced in the panchnama without losing any time. However, 44 Criminal Appeal No(s). 1954-1955 of 2022