JITENDRA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374 read with Sec. 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 4/8/2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 (hereinafter referred as to 'POCSO Act'), District-Mandleshwar in Sessions Trial No. 40/2018, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 9(m)/10 of the POCSO Act for 5 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000.00 and default stipulation.

(2.) The Prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 20/7/2018 at about 21:52, the complainant lodged a report that he is residing at village Khodi and doing agriculture work. He has three children. His elder daughter about about 11 years, younger daughter/victim aged about 9 years and a boy. On 15/7/2018, victim/daughter went to village for playing with other children. She did not take food in the evening and looked very sad and was scared. From 16/7/2018 to 20/7/2018, she was silent and scared. Being asked, she said on 15/7/2018 (Sunday), being holiday of the school, she was playing on road with the children of Jitendra Sirvi at about 2 in afternoon, Jitendra Sirvi proposed chocolate her with other children and took her to his home. Thereafter, he said her to take water from fridge. As soon as, she went to give water to Jitendra, he got naked. The appellant caught the prosecutrix and started patting on her back. Due to which, she got scared, freed her hand and run away from there and reached her home. The whole story told by the prosecutrix to her parents. On this complaint, in Police Station-Badwah, District-Khargone, offences under Sec. 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') and Sec. 9(m)/10 of POCSO Act, were registered against the appellant. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was filed and on the basis of available record, charges under Sec. 354 of IPC and Sec. 9(m)/10 of POCSO Act were framed. In turn, the accused/appellant abjured his guilt and prayed for trial.

(3.) In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution has adduced as many as seven witnesses namely the prosecutrix (PW-1), Pratapsingh, father of the prosecutrix (PW-2), Anil Ghodela, Medical Officer (PW-3), Ramkishan, Principal (PW-4), R.S. Rajput, Sub-Inspector (PW-5), Prakash (PW-6), R.S. Mandloi, S.I. (PW-7). On behalf of defence, no witness has been adduced.