that “the dog is here, so where is the child?” The accused appellant was wearing a lungi and baniyan at that point in time. 51. We feel that the evidence of the witness (PW-15) is neither here nor there because the witness does not give any indication of having seen the accused appellant with the child. The so-called person having long hair was not pinpointed by the prosecution, and hence, the testimony of this witness does not lend any support to the prosecution case. 52. Vikas Sanjerao Lokre [(PW-16), 1st Investigating Officer] was working as an Assistant Police Inspector at the Police Station Kasarvadavali on 30th September, 2013. He was assigned the investigation of the present case on 30th September, 2013. The witness (PW-16) stated that upon receiving the investigation file, he visited the site and undertook a search for the girl. He conducted intensive combing 42 Criminal Appeal No(s). 1954-1955 of 2022