(1.) The two short questions involved in this criminal appeal are as follows :-
(2.) The aforesaid questions of law arise for consideration on the following factual backdrop :-
(3.) Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, would submit that on the date of offence i.e. 25/08/2022, the appellant was on casual leave which is proved by the Attendance Register obtained under the RTI and therefore, the question of commission of offence by him does not arise. Moreover, it is not the case of the prosecution that despite being on casual leave, the appellant attended the school on that day and committed the offence and since the charge levelled against the appellant is very specific and the date and time of offence is clearly mentioned, therefore, the finding recorded by the trial Court that other than 25/08/2022, the offence was also committed by the appellant on other dates as well is absolutely illegal and bad in law, therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is liable to be set aside. He would further submit that an unexhibited document of prosecution can be made use of by the accused as per the decision rendered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the matter of LalluSingh S/o JagdishSingh Samgar v. State of M.P.,1996 MPLJ 452. as such, in the instant case a copy of the attendance register has been filed by the appellant which would show that he was on casual leave on the date of offence but it has not been relied upon, being an unexhibited document, and if the prosecution's case was that the appellant had committed the offence on other dates as well, there ought to have been specific charge in this regard in light of Ss. 211 and 221 of CrPC. The decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of Chittaranjan Das v. State of West Bengal,AIR 1963 SC 1696. and Gunwantlal v. State of Madhya Pradesh,AIR 1972 SC 1756. may be noticed profitably in this regard and the appellant be acquitted by granting the appeal.