Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
State Of Rajasthan vs Sonu @ Sohanlal on 1 June, 2017
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Leave To Appeal No. 115 / 2016
State Of Rajasthan
----Appellant
Versus
Sonu @ Sohanlal S/o Shri Surjan, B/c Bairwa, R/o Jaitpura, Police
Station Rawajnadugar, District Swaimadhopur (Raj.)
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________ For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, PP _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Judgment / Order 01/06/2017
1. State has preferred this leave to appeal aggrieved by judgment and order dated 19.11.2015 vide which the Court below has convicted the respondent for offence under Section 341 and 323 IPC and has given benefit of probation to the accused- respondent but the Court below has acquitted accused for offence under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act.
2. It is contended by learned Public Prosecutor that the accused-respondent forced himself upon the prosecutrix when she went out in the lunch break. It is contended that PW-6 Krishna and PW-7 Pinky are eyewitness to the incident and PW-1 prosecutrix has stated that when she went out during recess, the accused forcefully took her into the farm and tried to outrage her modesty.
3. I have considered the contentions and have perused the statement of the prosecutrix. Though, the prosecutrix in her (2 of 2) examination in chief has stated that in recess she went out to ease herself and the accused tried to outrage her modesty but in her cross-examination she has admitted that there is a toilet in the school premises and all the children use that toilet, she has also admitted that the teacher of the school was present and the main gate was not opened during the recess. The statements of Krishna PW-6 and Pinky PW-7 do not inspire confidence for the very reason that if the prosecutrix would have raised an alarm, it is natural that the other students of the school as well as the teacher would have rushed to the spot.
4. The Court below in view of the above has rightly acquitted the accused for offence under the POCSO Act.
5. From perusal of the evidence, it is evident that some minor dispute arose between children and the Court below has not committed any illegality in giving benefit of probation.
6. Considering the above no case is made out for entertaining the leave to appeal.
7. The same is rejected.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.
Arun/53