STATE OF U P Vs. KULDIP ALIAS KAMLESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The application has been moved for leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 27.7.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Hamirpur in Special Case Trial No.34 of 2016 (State Vs. Kuldip @ Kamlesh), by which the learned Judge has acquitted the accused-respondent Kuldip @ Kamlesh for the charges of offence under Sections 354(A), 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 of POCSO Act.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. submitted that it is proved from the evidence on record that the respondent-accused offered a mobile phone to 13 years old prosecutrix on 6.2.2016 at about 12 in noon when she was all alone at home and upon her denial he thrown away the mobile inside her house and since then outrages her modesty and also threatens of life and commits obscene acts; that the prosecutrix in her statement on oath has stated that after the incident the accused-respondent made a call on the mobile phone (thrown by him) wherein he demanded a sum of Rs.1,000/- from her and that some medicines were also thrown by him along with the mobile phone, and when she was going to school accused-respondent caught her from behind and told her to give the medicines provided by him to all the family members and then to approach him; that learned trial court has acted wrongly and illegally rather perversely in holding that throwing of the mobile phone or medicines as alleged, does not bring the action of accused-respondent within the definition of an offence under Section 354 or 354A I.P.C. or under Section 7/8 POCSO Act; that learned trial court has acted wrongly and perversely in acquitting the accused-respondent from the offences under Sections 354A, 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 of? POCSO Act; that in the circumstances the leave to appeal may be granted.