JUDGMENT :

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/accused/convict (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") laying challenge to judgment dated 03.09.2020, rendered by learned Special Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 123-N/VII/2020/2018, whereby the accused was convicted and imposed fine of Rs. 1000/- upon the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC").

2. Leaving fiddling little details, the facts of the case can tersely be summarized as under:

The prosecutrix moved an application to SHO Police Station, Nurpur, alleging therein that she is resident of village Samrel, Post Office, Baranda, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P., aged about 16 years. At about 12.00 noon, she was watching television in her house. On that day, there was a death in the village and her parents had gone there. In the meantime, accused Arjun Kumar came into her room and started forcibly teasing her and due to that, she found marks on her neck. When the accused was forcibly outraging her modesty, she was crying loudly. On her hue and cry, her mother came to home and on seeing her mother, the accused fled away from there and while the accused was leaving the place, he threatened her that if she disclosed anything to anyone, then he will kill her. After that, he fled away from the spot and her mother called his sister and brother-in-law and alongwith them, she went to Police Station for lodging the report. On this information, the formal FIR was registered. The victim was sent to the Civil Hospital, Nurpur for obtaining the MLC and the doctor disclosed that the injuries are simple blunt and during investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared the spot map, recorded the statements of witnesses and statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded and her date of birth record was obtained from the Panchayat and date of birth record of accused was also procured. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that the accused has committed offences punishable under Sections 452, 354A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. Heard. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the factum of the incidence, which was not at all an offence under Section 452, 354A, 323, 506 and under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. He has argued that no witness has proved the offence by the learned Court below just on the basis of conjectures and surmises convicted the present petitioner and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. He has further argued that no case was proved against the accused under Section 323 IPC and his conviction under Section 323 IPC is required to be set aside.

4. In reply thereto, the learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of the respondent/State has argued that the prosecution has proved the case under Section 323 IPC beyond reasonable doubt and he has rightly been convicted.

5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions of the parties, I have gone through the record carefully.

6. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as eight witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused. The statement of the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., was recorded and he claimed innocence. No defence witness was produced by the accused.

7. PW-1 is the prosecutrix, who deposed that she was studying in 10th Class in Govt. Senior Secondary School Rit, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. In the month of July, she appeared as SOS student in supplementary examination and her date of birth is 23.12.2002. She deposed that on 21.07.2018, she was watching TV around 10:30-11:00 a.m. Her parents had gone in the village to condole the death and