8. P.W.-5, Nasima Khatun (mother of the victim girl), likewise, P.Ws.- 1, 2 & 3 comes to say that on the fateful day at about 11.00 a.m. while she was in the hotel with the victim, one Rajesh (son of the appellants) came there calling the victim and as her mother was calling she (the victim) went with him, but never returned and on the same evening when she contacted the appellants and their family, but they bluntly refused about any knowledge as regard to her daughter. During the search P.W.-4 made and gives the information about the victim with absconding accused persons, Kurban, Balia and Pappu and, thereafter, her husband instituted the case and nine-ten days thereafter her daughter, the victim, could be recovered from Katihar, but apart from her statement contrary to prosecution version rather contrary to statements of P.W.-4 i.e. source of information about the victim being with three absconding accused persons etc. More so, had this witness being mother of the victim was aware of her going to the appellants on call, which was bluntly refused. It was the normal conduct to intimate the police immediately, but even if on the ground of family prejudice etc., it is not proper to immediately institute a
