Thakorlal D. Vadgama v State of Gujarat (1973) — "entices" reaches the slow allurement that precedes the leaving

Varadarajan protects the man who merely receives a minor who has decided for herself. Vadgama closes the door that reading might open: where the accused has, over time, created in the minor the desire to leave, her leaving is his enticing. Read together they give you the two verbs of s. 137(1)(b) and the line between them.

The appellant was "an industrialist, had a factory at Bunder Road" with his residential bungalow adjoining it. Mohini, a girl of about fifteen, left her parents' house and went to the appellant's premises, where she stayed. The appellant was tried on charges under IPC s. 366 and IPC s. 376; the trial court convicted him on both; the High Court acquitted him of rape but maintained the conviction under IPC s. 366. Before the Supreme Court his case was that Mohini had "left her parents' house out of her own accord due to the harsh treatment of her parents", and that he had kept her "out of compassion and sympathy for the helpless girl", so that the charge of kidnapping failed for want of any taking or enticing.

Whether, on Varadarajan's own test, a minor who leaves home herself can nonetheless have been "enticed" out of her guardian's keeping by the accused; and what "entice" means.

The Court defined the second verb: "The word 'entice' means to involve the idea of inducement or allurement by giving rise to hope or desire in the other." Enticement need not be a single act at the moment of leaving; the earlier conduct of the accused towards the girl — his attentions and intimacy — could be the allurement that produced her desire to go to him. On the evidence the Court held that "the conviction of the appellant under that section is correct and has to be maintained". Though he had been "acquitted of the offence of rape", the Court could not shut its eyes to his "previous improper intimacy with Mohini", which the Court treated as "aggravating factors"; the sentence was "already very lenient". "This appeal must, therefore, fail and is dismissed."

1. "Entices" is satisfied by inducement or allurement that gives rise to hope or desire in the minor; it looks to the accused's conduct, which may be gradual and earlier in time than the leaving.
2. A minor's leaving "of her own accord" does not answer a charge of enticement if the accord was itself the product of the accused's allurement.
3. Varadarajan and Vadgama are two sides of one test: the question is always whether the accused's conduct brought about the minor's willingness.

• IPC s. 361's "takes or entices" is now s. 137(1)(b), with the punishment in s. 137(2) (up to seven years); "child" is anyone under eighteen (s. 2(3)).
• IPC s. 366 — kidnapping or abducting a woman to compel her marriage or to force or seduce her to illicit intercourse — is s. 87 (up to ten years and fine).
• Vadgama's meaning of "entices" governs the same word in s. 137(1)(b); nothing in the Sanhita's text changes it.