SHRI TAPAN BOSE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 22.3.2002, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bokaro in Cr. Appeal No. 96 of 2000, whereby and where under the appeal preferred by the opposite party no. 2 against the judgment and order of conviction dated 19.9.2000, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Bokaro at Chas in G.R. Case No.1324 of 1995, convicting the O.P. No. 2 for the offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo S.I. for one year has been allowed and the opposite party no. 2 has been acquitted from the charges levelled against him.

(2.) An FIR was instituted by the petitioner, in which it was alleged that the opposite party no. 2 on 30.8.1995 at about 10 P.M. had touched the front portion of the body of his daughter. It has been alleged that the victim had disclosed that the opposite party no 2 had pressed her breast and had fondled her thigh several times. Based on the aforesaid allegations, B.S. City P.S. Case No. 433/1995 was instituted under sections 354/351 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) After investigation culminated in submission of charge sheet, cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro on 29.1996 under section 341/354 of the Indian Penal Code and the case was transferred to the court of Shri B. Prasad, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Bokaro. After charges were framed trial commenced. Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Bokaro at Chas by judgement dated 19.9.2000 was pleased to convict the opposite party no. 2 for the offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and had sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The appeal preferred by the opposite party no. 2 being Cr. Appeal No. 96 of 2000 was allowed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bokaro by judgment dated 22.2002 and the opposite party no. 2 was acquitted from the charges levelled against him. Being aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the learned appellate court, the petitioner has preferred the present application.