Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Fa
Case Details
1 SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.08.06 10:42:59 +0530 2025:CGHC:38242-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1401 of 2023 Arjun @ Ajay Markam S/o Chaitram Markam Aged About 20 Years R/o Manjhiborand, Patelpara, Police Station Farasgaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Farasgaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant(s) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru Judgment on Board Per, Bibhu Datta Guru, J 04/08/2025 1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C is against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2 18.05.2023 passed in POCSO Case No. 57/2020 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge FTSC (POCSO), Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, C.G., whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence U/s 366 of the IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation. U/s 376(3) of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation. U/s 376(2) (n) of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation. U/s 42 of the POCSO Act as per Rigorous imprisonment for 20 years the alternative sentence U/s 6 of and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default the POCSO Act. stipulation. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is the mother of the victim has appeared before the concerned police station by filing a written report to the effect that the accused, resident of village Manjhiborand, contacted her minor daughter through mobile phone; lured her and raped her by making physical relations with her at the intervals of one or two days for one month on the pretext of marriage, due to which her daughter/victim has become pregnant. On the basis of the said report, a crime was registered against the accused in Farasgaon police station 3 under Crime No. 111/2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 (3), 376 (2) (n) of the IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and taken into investigation. 3. During investigation, Spot Map (Ex.P/18) was prepared. Statement of the Victim and the Statements of witnesses were recorded. Subsequently after completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted before the Court. 4. After framing the charges against the accused/appellant, the charges were read out and explained to the appellant, he denied committing the crime and demanded trial. 5. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined 13 witnesses in its support. Statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein he has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter. 6. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 18.05.2023 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 7.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the conviction against the appellant is bad in law and it is not supported by the evidence of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. He would submit that while passing the impugned judgment the trial Court failed 4 to appreciate the fact that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. He would submit that the medical report and the DNA report are not supported the version of the prosecution. In the evidence of the witnesses, it can be seen that there are material contradiction and omissions. Learned counsel further submits that without there being any cogent evidence against the appellant, the conviction of the appellant is bad in the eyes of law. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant and submits that the conviction of the appellant is well merited which does not call for any interference. Therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection. 10. As far as the question arises before this Court regarding the age of the victim on the date of incident is concerned, the trial Court has rightly appreciated the fact that the victim is below the age of 16 years at the time of incident and also the victim (PW/1) has categorically stated in her statement that her date of birth is 25/04/2006 and for proving the said fact, the prosecution has adduced the evidence with regard to her age in the form of copy of Dakhil Kharij Register (Ex.P/20C) wherein the age of the victim has been recorded as 25/04/2006. 11. So far as the question regarding the illicit sexual intercourse with the 5 victim is concerned, the prosecution has examined the witnesses to prove its case. 12. PW/1 – victim has stated in her statement that the appellant was used to call her repeatedly and asked to meet her and threatened her that if she did not come to meet him, she would face the consequences, she afraid of which and went to meet him. When she reached the spot the accused had said to her that he likes her and wants to marry her, he spread a towel on the ground and made her lie down and made illicit sexual intercourse with her twice. Thereafter she returned to her home and the accused also went to his home. She stated that after that day, the accused kept calling the victim regularly and made physical relations with her several times due to which, she became pregnant. She further stated that she was continuously calling the accused but the accused was not picking up her phone. Then she told her elder sister and mother about the incident. The next day a meeting of the society was held in the village where the accused and his villagers were also present. In the meeting, when the community members asked her about her pregnancy, she told them the name of the accused. Then the villagers of the accused said that this is not him. The accused did not recognize her and said that he had not done anything wrong with her. Upon which, she and her family members went to Farasgaon police station and lodged a complaint against the accused. In her cross-examination, she categorically stated that the accused had established physical relations with her, however she did not 6 tell this to her family. Further she denied the suggestion that she had a love affair with one Shankar Korram. She also denied the suggestion that she had a love affair with another boy namely; Jairam Markam. She denied the suggestion that she became pregnant by Shankar Korram. 13. Mother of the victim examined as PW/2 stated in her deposition that she knows the accused. When the babybump of victim was seen, she enquired about the same on which the victim told her that owing to corporeal relation with the accused she became pregnant and for which a society meeting was convened and in the said meeting the accused present and denied the relationship with the victim. Thereafter, they lodged the report. However, in cross-examination this witness stated she does not know with whom the victim was met. She further stated that the victim has relation with one Jayram Markam and with regard to this, a social meeting was also held. She stated that the she does not know whether the society punished said Jairam Markam with a fine of Rs. 1400/- for having relationship with the victim. At para 4 she stated that the victim never stated that with whom she was in relationship. She also admitted the fact that the victim has nothing stated in the village meeting. 14. Sister of the victim was examined as PW/3, who was declared hostile, has categorically stated in her deposition that in the month of March 2020, she used to receive calls from unknown number on her mobile phone but she did not receive it. One day, when she picked up the call, the accused abused her and asked her why she was not picking up his 7 call. She further stated that one day she had left her mobile, a call was received from the same number on which the victim had talked and she kept talking to him after that day. After some time, the victim told her and her mother about the incident. She further stated that the victim did not tell her that the accused had misbehaved with her and was constantly having physical relations with her due to which she had become pregnant. 15. Perusal of the above statements, it is clear that the victim had a love affair with some another person. The statement of the prosecutrix that she did not tell to her family after the incident has been occurred, this itself creates doubt. The statement of the victim has lost credence in the eyes of this Court due to significant inconsistencies and a lack of corroborative evidence. Upon thorough examination, the testimony failed to align with established facts and appeared to shift under cross- examination, raising concerns about its reliability. Furthermore, contradictions with other witnesses accounts and material records further undermined its trustworthiness. As a result, the Court cannot rely on the statement as a credible basis, emphasizing the importance of consistency, clarity, and supporting evidence in the pursuit of justice. 16. Insofar as, the victim has delivered a female child. The prosecution alleged that the child was born due to corporeal relation between the victim and accused; however, it failed to substantiate this claim with credible and convincing evidence. Mere assertions without supporting proof cannot be the basis for such a serious conclusion. As a result, the 8 Court finds that the prosecution has not discharged its burden of proof, and the alleged relationship between the accused and the child remains unproven in the eyes of law. 17. PW/13 – Ms. Rukmani Mandavi, ASI stated in her statement that on 04- 03-2022, she had sent the blood sample of the victim, her newly born daughter; as also the accused, for DNA test in the above case through the Superintendent of Police, Kondagaon, along with a report to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur, which is Exhibited as P/42. On 29-09-2022, she had requested the FSL, Raipur, for providing DNA test opinion through the Superintendent of Police, Kondagaon, thereafter she received the DNA test opinion of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur. In her cross-examination, she categorically stated that in the DNA report (Ex- P-45) submitted by her, it is mentioned that the female child/ Ex.-C (162/22) is not the biological child of the appellant/ Exhibit-A (160/22). 18. Perusal of the above statement and after analysing the DNA report and other corroborative evidence on record clearly indicate that the accused is not the biological father of the female child delivered by the victim. Despite the claim of the victim, no conclusive proof e.g. DNA testing or credible supporting testimony was provided to establish paternity. In fact, the inconsistencies in the statement of the victim, coupled with the absence of medical or scientific evidence, further weaken the case of the prosecution. Accordingly, the Court finds that the accused cannot be held responsible as the biological father of the child and any allegations 9 based on that presumption lack legal and factual foundation. 19.
Decision
For the foregoing reasons, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had forcefully taken away the Victim and raped her. Since it is proved by the DNA report that the female child was not born owing to physical relation with the accused, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appellant is entitled to be acquitted from the charges leveled against him under Sections 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of the IPC. Since the prosecution story itself lacks credibility in the eyes of the Court and it has been proven fact that the appellant has not any relation with the victim hence we are of the opinion that the appellant shall also be acquitted of the charge of Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 20. In view of the above, the accused is acquitted of all the charges for which he was tried. It is stated that the appellant is in jail. He shall be released forthwith if no longer required in any other criminal case. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. 21. Keeping in view the provisions of Section 437-A of the CrPC, the accused-appellant, is directed to forthwith furnish a personal bond in terms of Form No. 45 prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure of sum of Rs.25,000/- each with two reliable sureties in the like amount before the Court concerned which shall be effective for a period of six months along with an undertaking that in the event of filing of Special Leave Petition against the instant judgment or for grant of leave, the aforesaid appellant on receipt of notice thereof shall appear before the 10 Hon’ble Supreme Court. 22. The trial court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha ) Chief Justice $ Bhilwar/ Jyoti