State of Chhattisgarh v. Pitambar Chouhan
Case Details
Page No.1 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2025.03.12 17:43:41 +0530 2025:CGHC:10833-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 1526 of 2019 (Arising out of judgment dated 29.06.2019, passed in Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No.12 of 2019 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Pitambar Chouhan @ Montu @ Pritam Chouhan) by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh (CG)] Pitambar Chouhan @ Montu @ Preetam Chouhan, S/o Late Nandlal Chouhan Aged About 32 Years R/o Rajiv Gandhi Nagar Chowki Jute Mill Raigarh, At Present R/o Kusmura Indira Nagar, Police Station Kotraroad, Raigarh, District - Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant (In Jail) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Kotraroad, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant For Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and e Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Hon'ble Shri Justic : Mr. Varunendra Mishra, Advocate : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J Judgment on Board (05.03.2025) (1) This criminal appeal filed by the accused-appellant under Section 374(2) of CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.06.2019, passed in Page No.2 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No.12 of 2019 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Pitambar Chouhan @ Montu @ Pritam Chouhan) by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh (CG), whereby he has been convicted and sentenced as under: Conviction U/s. 376(3) of IPC U/s. 06 of the POCSO Act, 2012 Sentence Rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 05 months. Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 months. U/s. 342 of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 03 months. (2) The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 24.03.2019, at
Legal Reasoning
the place mentioned in the FIR (Ex.P/07), the accused-appellant herein firstly illegally confined the minor victim (PW-04), who was aged about 11 years 06 months, in his house, situated at Indira Nagar, Kusmura and, thereafter, committed sexual assault/intercourse with her against her will and consent and, thereby, said to have committed the aforesaid offences. (3) The further case of the prosecution is that on the date of offence, when the victim (PW-04) had gone to her maternal grand- mother’s house, but she did not return till 06 PM in he evening, her missing person report was lodged by her father (PW-05) and, during the course of investigation, the victim (PW-04) was found in the Page No.3 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 house of the appellant. Thereafter, victim’s statement under Section 164 of CrPC was recorded vide Ex.P/09, wherein she implicated the name of the present appellant to be the author of the crime, pursuant to which, FIR (Ex.P/01) was registered against the appellant and wheels of investigation started running in the crime, in which, site map was prepared vide Ex.P/01. After obtaining necessary consent vide Ex.P/03 & Ex.P/04, the victim (PW-04) was subjected to medical examination, which was conducted by Dr. Santoshi Gupta (PW-02) and, as per her MLC report (Ex.P/06), it has been opined that no definite opinion can be given regarding sexual assault. Further, victim’s slide were prepared and handed- over to the police alongwith her leggings for analysis, which were seized vide Ex.P/17. The accused-appellant was arrested vide Ex.P/20 and sent for medical examination. Appellant’s MLC report is Ex.P/22 & P/24. The seized articles were sent for chemical examination and, as per FSL report (Ex.C1), it has been opined that stains of human sperm/semen were found on leggings of the victim. (4) In order to ascertain correct age of the victim, copy of her school admission register (Ex.P/26C) and admission certificate (Ex.P/27) were obtained/seized vide Ex.P/18, wherein date of birth of the victim (PW-4) has been recorded as 13.05.2007, meaning thereby, the victim (PW-04) was minor aged about 11 years 10 months on the date of offence. Further, with regard to age of the victim, her age certification-cum-medical report has also been Page No.4 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 obtained vide Ex.P/15, wherein it has been mentioned that upon radiological examination of the victim (PW-04) her age has been found to between 12-14 years. In the present case, the victim (PW- 04) was also subjected to counselling to the Women Welfare Committee, Raigar and, as per its report (Ex.P/11), it has been opined that the appellant has committed sexual intercourse with the minor victim (PW-04), due to which, she is under fear. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded and, after due investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences in the competent criminal Court having jurisdiction, which was thereafter committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and trial in accordance with law, in which, the appellant abjured his guilt and entered into defence by stating that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. (5) The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 09 witnesses and exhibited 34 documents apart from FSL report (Ex.C1), whereas the appellant in support of his defence, though not examined any witness, but exhibited 01 document. (6) The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, proceeded to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Sections 376(3), 342 of IPC and under Section 06 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced him as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused Page No.5 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence.
Legal Reasoning
(7) Mr. Varunendra Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned trial Court is absolutely unjustified in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offence. In view of questions framed and answers given by the victim (PW-04) in her statement before the Court, the learned trial Court has erred in law while holding the appellant guilty for the offences in question. Learned counsel vehemently argued that in the instant case neither the medical evidence nor the forensic evidence support the case of the prosecution. Hence, the present appeal be allowed and the appellant be acquitted from the charges in question. (8) Per-contra, learned State counsel would submit that prosecution has been able to prove the offences beyond reasonable doubt by leading evidence of clinching nature. It is further submitted on behalf of the respondent-State that in view of statement of the victim (PW-04), wherein she has clearly narrated the incident and implicated appellant herein to be the author of the crime in question, coupled with other evidence available on record i.e. FSL report (Ex.C1) and report of Child Welfare Committee (Ex.P/11), the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the offence mentioned herein-above. Therefore, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. Page No.6 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 (9) We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. (10) In the instant case, considering the statement of the victim (PW-04), wherein she has clearly narrated the incident in question and implicated the appellant herein to be the author of the crime by stating that on the date of offence while she was going to her maternal grand-mother’s house, the appellant forcibly took her to his house, where he firstly removed all her clothes and committed sexual assault with her. The said statement of the victim (PW-04) is duly supported by her father (PW-05), who reported the matter to the police and lodged FIR (Ex.P/01). The victim (PW-04) was also subjected to some length of cross-examination, but she remained consistent in her version and, therefore, her testimonies inspire confidence and can be relied upon to hold the appellant guilty for the offences in question. Further, the said statement of the victim (PW-04) is also in conformity with other evidence available on record i.e. (i) FSL report (Ex.C1), wherein it has been opined that stains of human sperm/semen were found on the leggings of the victim and (ii) report of Child Welfare Committee, Raigarh (Ex.P/11), wherein it has been opined that upon counseling of the victim (PW-04), it has been found that the appellant herein has committed sexual intercourse with her. Moreover, according to victim’s school admission register (Ex.P/26C) and admission certificate (Ex.P/27), Page No.7 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 her date of birth has been recorded as 13.05.2007, meaning thereby, the victim (PW-04) was minor aged about 11 years 10 months on the date of offence and, even, with regard to age of the victim, her age certification-cum-medical report has also been obtained vide Ex.P/15, wherein it has been mentioned that upon radiological examination of the victim (PW-04) her age has been found to between 12-14 years. As such, on the basis of aforesaid evidence available on record, the finding recorded by the learned trial Court that the appellant is guilty of having committed offences in question with the minor victim (PW-04), is strictly in accordance with law and, for which, he has rightly been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court. Accordingly, we hereby affirm the said finding. (11) In that view of the matter, we do not find any good ground to interfere in the findings recorded by the learned trial Court while convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offences under Section 376(3) & 342 of IPC and under Section 06 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Accordingly, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court dated 29.06.2019 is hereby affirmed being well-merited. (12) Consequently, this criminal appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost. Page No.8 of 8 IN CRA-1526-2019 (13) The Registry of this Court is directed to sent a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is languishing, informing him that he is at liberty to assail this judgment before Hon’ble Supreme Court by preferring an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India with the aid and assistance of the Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee or that of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Judge s@if