ORDER

This petition seeking leave to appeal has been filed by the petitioner/State u/S 378(3) of Cr.P.C. against the judgment of acquittal dated 04.10.2019 pronounced by the Additional Sessions Judge, Garoth Distt. Mandsaur in S.T.72/2017 whereby the respondent has been acquitted from the charges framed u/S 363, 354, 354-A of IPC and Sec 7 r/W 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Prosecution case in brief is that on 20.01.2017, at about 15:00 hours

,when complainant's minor daughter aged about 16 years was going to her school and reached near Shyamgarh Bus Stand, respondent came there on motorcycle and got the minor prosecutrix seated on his motorcycle and took her towards Hotel Aman Palace. When prosecutrix screamed, he stopped the motorcycle, caught hold of her hand and tried to take the prosecutrix forcefully into the hotel. Witnesses Deepak Bairagi and Ajay Soni approached the prosecutrix, then respondent fled away from the spot. Prosecutrix informed her father - complainant, who reached the spot and lodged the FIR (Ex. P-3). Prosecutrix was sent to Shyamgarh Hospital for medical examination. On 21.01.2017, respondent was arrested and motorcycle used in the crime was seized from his possession. School Scholar Register alongwith copy of Board of Secondary Education Marksheet of prosecutrix were obtained with regard to age of the prosecutrix. After completion of investigation, chargsheet was filed.

Learned trial Court framed charges against the respondent for the offences punishable u/Ss 363, 354 and 354(A) of IPC and Sec 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Respondent abjured his guilt and pleaded his false implication in the matter and trial Court while passing impugned judgment of acquittal discussed the evidence available on record and arrived at a conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove this fact beyond reasonable doubt that on the date of incident, respondent abducted minor prosecutrix and with an intent to outrage the modesty of prosecutrix assaulted or used criminal force on her. Therefore without any corroborative evidence on the basis of inconsistent statement of prosecutrix, it is not safe to hold the respondent guilty for the aforesaid offences.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of acquittal, State has preferred this petition u/S 378(3) of Cr.P.C. seeking leave to appeal on the ground that findings recorded by the trial Court to acquit the respondent are illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law, as material evidence adduced by the prosecution has not been properly appreciated.

Learned counsel for the applicant/State submits that prosecutrix was admittedly minor at the time of incident. She in her statement recorded during trial has fully supported the prosecutrix case. Independent witness Deepak Bairagi (PW-2) has also supported the prosecution case. There is no inconsistency in the statement about the incident. Even, then respondent has been acquitted from the charges. Impugned judgment is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside. Hence, this petition may be allowed and leave to appeal may be granted.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant/State at length and perused the record.

Prosecutrix (PW-1) deposed that on the date of incident at about 15:00

hours when she was going to her school, respondent alongwith his friend Sahil came to her and they took the prosecutrix on motorcycle and went towards Hotel Aman Palace. She deposed when she screamed, then respondent caught hold of her hand. In the meantime, witness Deepak Bairagi came there, then respondent fled away from the spot. Deepak Bairagi(PW-2) deposed entirely different story and stated that he saw the respondent alongwith prosecutrix in front of Hotel Aman Palace. He specifically deposed that at that time, respondent was stated to have got prosecutrix seated on his motorcycle. He specifically denied this fact that respondent was accompanied by any of his friends. Their statements are contrary on th