(1.) THE complainant has filed this application under Sections 435 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against an order discharging the accused -opposite party for offence under Sections 354 and 420, Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate discharged the accused opposite party for offence under Section 253(1) of the Code. An application in revision against the said order before the Sessions Court has also been dismissed.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner was that there was a written agreement between the husband of the complainant -petitioner and the opposite party by virtue of which the opposite party was to execute a sale deed on receiving full consideration money. This agreement was of the year 1962. On 11th of Jan. 1965, at about 7 P.M. the opposite party came to the petitioner and demanded Rs. 2,000/ - towards consideration money of the said sale deed and further told her that the sale deed would be written and executed in her favour at the Monghyr Gurudwara where she should come. She paid the money. On the following day, i.e., the 12th of January, 1965, she accompanied by one Chandrawati, who was examined as a prosecution witness in the case, went to the Gurudwara at about 4.30 P.M. The opposite party did not execute the sale deed, rather he wanted to outrage her modesty, assaulted her with that intent and caught hold of her hand and also abused her.
(3.) THE petitioner had lodged a first information report at the town police station, Monghyr. Police submitted final report in the case declaring the case to be false. On 20th of January, 1965, the petitioner filed a protest petition which was treated as a petition of complaint. The learned Magistrate has discussed the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution and has held that as the prosecution on the evidence adduced failed to make out ingredients of the offences under Sections 354 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code he was discharging the accused under Section 253 of the Code.