POORAN BANSAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the present appeal being aggrieved by judgment dated 17.7.2014 passed by the learned Seventh Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No.432/2014, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 354-A(1) a of IPC and Sections 7/8, 9/10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as "POCSO Act"?) and conjointly sentenced to undergo 7 years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo additional 6 months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The prosecution's case, in short, is that, the prosecutrix (PW-1) is the real daughter of the appellant who was a minor girl of 12 years of age at the time of incident and was living with her parents. She has lodged a report, Ex.P/1 at Police StationChunabhatti, District-Bhopal, alleging therein that the appellant who is her father, after consuming liquor, was used to commit sexual assault upon her. Whenever the appellant comes home after consuming liquor and find the prosecutrix alone, he used to touch, kiss and press her body with bad intention by laying her down on bed and removing her clothes. On resistance from the prosecutrix, the appellant was used to threaten her and continue to commit sexual assault with her. The prosecutrix narrated about these incidents to her mother. When her mother questioned the appellant of these incidents, the appellant threatened her as well as the prosecutrix and continued to commit sexual assault upon her. Once the mother of the prosecutrix also saw the incident when the appellant was committing sexual assault upon the prosecutrix. When she objected, the appellant beaten her and the prosecutrix as well. Then, the prosecutrix went along with her mother and lodged a report at Police Station-Chunabhatti, District-Bhopal which was registered as crime No.82/2014 for offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC and other offences under the POCSO Act. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed and case was committed to the Court, which was registered as S.T. No.432/2014. The trial Court framed the charges of offence under Section 354- A(1)a of IPC and Sections 9/10, 7/10 of POCSO Act against the appellant. The appellant denied all the charges. Prosecution has examined five witnesses.

(3.) The appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. He has admitted that the prosecutrix was his daughter but denied the other incriminating evidence and took a specific plea that his wife and sister of his wife committed maarpeet with him and lodged a false report against him by using his daughter as a tool. He has also stated that his daughter started working as a maid and he objected the same, therefore, she along with her mother lodged a false report against him. However, no witness was examined in defence.