STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VITHHALBHAI PUNAMBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the State, under Section 378 Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 4.6.1994, rendered in Criminal Case No. 2023 of 1989 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Petlad. The said case was registered against the respondent accused for the offence punishable under Sections 254 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the State on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by the learned JMFC is contrary to law and evidence on record.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case the complainant Punjabhai Shanabhai Talpada (Vaghri) of Shihol filed complaint before Mehlav Police Station, District Kheda being CR No.I -84 of 1989 on 4.9.1989 for the offence u/s. 354 I.P. Code against the present respondent accused. It is the case of the prosecution that the daughter of the complainant, namely, Divaliben, aged 7 years, was grazing the buffalo in the sim of Randol village and at that time the respondent accused Vitthalbhai Punambhai Talpada (Vaghri) chased the prosecutrix just to take an advantage of loneliness and tried to outrage her modesty. The prosecutrix made hue and cry and therefore the people nearby the surrounding area rushed and, therefore, the respondent accused ran away. Then the complaint was filed by the complainant against the respondent and he was arrested. Then the investigation was carried out and the respondent accused was arrested and thereafter charge -sheet was filed against the present respondent accused before the trial Court. The charge was framed against the respondent accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. Thereafter, the prosecution led oral as well as documentary evidence to prove its case against the present respondent. The statement of the respondent u/s.313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded. At the conclusion of the trial the learned trial Judge has found no substance in the prosecution case and, therefore, acquitted the respondent accused from the said offence vide impugned Judgment. The said Judgment of the trial Court has been challenged by the State on the ground that the Judgment and order passed by the learned Special Judge is against the law and evidence on record.

(3.) I have heard learned APP Ms. Darshana Pandit on behalf of the Appellant State Government and learned Advocate Mr. B.Y. Mankad, appearing on behalf of the respondent accused. I have also gone through the Judgment and order passed by the trial Court.