JUDGMENT : – The victim/appellant has preferred the present appeal under section 372 of Cr.P.C., being aggrieved with the judgment of acquittal dated 13-6-2019 passed by learned District Judge, Sheopur in S.T.No. 75/2017 whereby respondents No. 1 and 2 have been acquitted from charge of offences under sections 341, 354-D(1)(i), 506 Part II and 509 of IPC and sections 11(1)/12 and 11(4)/12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the POCSO Act’).

2. Precisely stated case of prosecution is that victim aged 17 years lodged a complaint at Police Station, Karahal District Sheopur with the allegations that on 6-8-2017 around 8:30 a.m. when she was coming back with her friend Ranu Tiwari from tuition at Tomar Sir’s place and reached Kali Mata temple then the accused persons came on a motorcycle from back side and obstructed the path of victim and made explicit sexual overtures. They expressed their obscene gesture by commenting that she looks good and they love her. Complainant and her friend became frightened and they were told not to narrate the incident to anybody otherwise they will face dire consequences and threatened for death. They returned back to her home and victim narrated the incident to her parents. Thereafter, she along with her father Kamalkishore reached Police Station Karahal District Sheopur where FIR got registered at crime No. 120/2017 for offence under sections 354-D, 341, 506 of IPC and section 11(1) and 12 of the POCSO Act and investigation started.

3. Investigating Officer Sunil Sharma (PW-7) prepared spot map and statement of victim taken under section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. Document of admission register of victim was taken for age determination. Accused persons were arrested and statements of other witnesses were recorded. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused persons for the offences narrated above.

4. Trial Court framed the charge under sections 341, 354-D(1)(i), 506 Part II and 509 of IPC and sections 11(1) read with section 12 and 11(4) read with section 12 of the POCSO Act. Accused persons abjured their guilt and demanded for trial and therefore trial conducted. Accused took defence of false implication because of land dispute. On behalf of prosecution total eight witnesses were examined and on behalf of defence total three witnesses were examined.

5. After framing questions and appreciating the evidence (oral as well as documentary), trial Court came to the conclusion about innocence of accused and did not find the case of prosecution as proved beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, acquittal was recorded in favour of accused persons/respondents No. 1 and 2.

6. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court, victim (referred as Miss X in the cause title just to protect her identity), preferred the instant appeal. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant/victim that trial Court grossly erred in coming to the conclusion while recording innocence of respondents No. 1 and 2 and caused illegality. Learned counsel referred the conclusion drawn by the trial Court in para 15 by narrating important omissions and contradictions which according to counsel for the appellant are nothing but perversity.

7. It is the submission of counsel for the appellant that all nine omissions and contradictions tried to be established by the trial Court while reaching to the conclusion about acquittal based upon perversity because omissions and contradictions were never existed to such extent where finding of acquittal could have been given by the trial Court. He referred contents of FIR (Ex-P/1 as well as Ex-P/5) and statements of victim under section 161 (Ex-D/3) and 164 (Ex-D/2) of Cr.P.C. and her Court statement as PW-2 which are almost on same page and no sufficient variation and omission existed in such doc