JUDGMENT :- This appeal has been filed by Dinesh Chandra Sharma son of late Sita Ram Sharma, resident of Mohalla Hayat Nagar, P.S. Hayat Nagar, District Moradabad against the judgement and order dated 20-12-2006 passed by Sri Ashok Kumar, Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 3, Muradabad in S. T. No. 128 of 2006 (Crime No. 726 of 2005) whereby he found the appellant guilty and convicted him under Section 354 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and half years.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a first information report Ex-ka-1 written by Khan Suhail Azam was lodged by Dil Nawaz father of the prosecutrix at P.S. Hayatnagar, District Moradabad on 12-9-2005 at 1.45 p.m. alleging that his daughter who was a student of Class IV in Shishu Shiksha Niketan, run by accused was asked by the accused on 12-9-2005 at about 1 p.m. when the school closed for the day, to stay back as he wanted her to recite a lesson. When other students and teachers left the school, accused took the daughter of the informant inside the room at about 1 p.m. and started behaving indecently and also started opening her nara forcibly. Her daughter was scared and she shouted loudly and on hearing the noise Mohd, Munawar son of Maqbool Khan, Imtyaz son of Sazid Khan and others of Mohalla reached there and saw the incident and saved his daughter from Dinesh Chandra Sharma accused.

3. Constable Daya Shanker, C.W.-l was posted as constable clerk at P.S. Hayat Nagar on 12-9-2005. Written report was presented by Dil Nawaz and on that basis he prepared the check report Ex-ka-4. Case was registered in the General Diary at rapat No. 24 and its copy has been proved as Ex-ka-5. This witness has also stated that Sub-Inspector Upendra Singh and constable returned to the police station along with accused at 3.10 p.m. and entry was made in the General Diary at rapat No. 26. The witness proved the copy of the general diary Ex-ka-6. He also proved the photocopies of the original General Diary no. 24 and 26 as Ex-ka-7 and Ex-ka8.

4. Sub-Inspector Upendra Singh P.W.-4 was posted at P.S. Hayat Nagar on 12-9-2005. He started the investigation on the same day and after copying the report and the general diary in the case diary, interrogated the check writer. Accused was arrested same day. On 13-9-2005 he interrogated the informant Dil Nawaz and his daughter the prosecutrix. He inspected the place of occurrence at the pointing of the informant and prepared the site plan Ex-ka-2. He also interrogated the witnesses Mohd. Manzoor and Imtiyaz Khan on 14-9-2005. After completing the investigation submitted the charge sheet Ex-ka-3 against the accused under Section 376/511 IPC on 14-9-2005.

5. Case of the accused was committed to the Court of Session by learned C.J.M. by order dated 20-3-2006. Charge was framed against the accused under Section 376/511 IPC on 5-7-2006. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In support of its case, prosecution led evidence and besides the above noted formal witnesses examined Dil Nawaz P.W.-l, prosecutrix P.W.-2 and Imtiyaz P.W.-3 as witnesses of fact and occurrence. These witnesses have stated about the prosecution case.

7. Accused was examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. and he admitted that prosecutrix was a student in Class-IV. The school used to close at 1 p.m.. However he denied the remaining prosecution case and contended that prosecutrix was not present on that date in his school at the time of the alleged incident and that he did not commit any offence as alleged. The witnesses have given false statements. The police made wrong investigation under political pressure and the pressure of the Muslim community. His school was in Muslim dominated area and the people there wanted to get his school closed and conspired with the police. Witnesses have given evidence against him as they are relations and were under the influence of the police and the Muslim community. Muzammil Danish, relation of the informant had Nighat Public School bu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document