SADAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is only one petitioner in this ease. He has been convicted under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. After his conviction by the learned Magistrate, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was heard by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Patna, and the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner thereafter preferred the present application in revision and it may be mentioned that it was admitted by the Bench only on the question of sentence.

(2.) The case of the prosecution briefly stated, was as follows. Yijay Rani (P. W. 3), daughter of the informant Awadheah Kumar Verma, an employee of the Public Relation Department of the Government of Bihar, was in the morning shift of the School and on the 12th November, 1965, at about 6 A. M. the informant went to the main road with his daughter so that he may reach the girl to the bus for going to her School.' It is said that at that time, when the informant had gone some steps ahead behind his daughter, the petitioner came on a cycle from a lane and he slowed his cycle near the girl and acoosted her. He uttered the words, ' Rani Ban Than Kar Kahan Ja Rahi Ho." It was the further case of the prosecution that the petitioner told the girl to come along with him on his cycle and he would reach her. The age of the girl was about 12 to 13 years and it is further said that the petitioner was in the habit of teasing and vexing her by using vulgar and obscene words, whenever this petitioner found the girl passing alone.

(3.) According to the prosecution, the informant ran to catch hold of the petitioner, but he speeded his cycle and fled, away from there. But, Badha Shyam Dutta (P. W. 2), who is a retired responsible Government Officer, was close by and he would see the occurrence and could identify the petitioner. An F.I.R. was lodged and then the Police took up investigation and charge-sheet was submitted in the case. The learned Magistrate, as stated above, found the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 294 of the Penal Code and there is thus a concurrent finding both by the learned Magistrate and the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, who heard the appeal, on the point that the petitioner was guilty under Section 294 of the Penal Code.