State of Chhattisgarh v. Ramashankar
Case Details
Page No.1 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2025.01.17 17:12:23 +0530 2025:CGHC:2580 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 1714 of 20 19 [Arising out of judgment dated 28.06.2018, passed in Sessions Case No.158 of 2013 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Ramashankar @ Badka), by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Durg (C.G.)] Ramashankar @ Badka, Son of Ram Singare, aged about 23 years, Resident of Ruabandha Basti, Kundrapara, Shivnagar, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through the Station House Officer, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) ---- Appellant (In Jail) ---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant For Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. K.P. Sahu, Advocate : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Adv. Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal 15.01.2025 (Judgment on Board) (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 28.06.2018, passed in Sessions Case No.158 of 2013 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Ramashankar @ Badka), by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Durg (C.G.), whereby he has been convicted for offence under Page No.2 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 Section 376(2)(h) of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.500/- and, in default of payment of fine amount, sentenced to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 months. (2) The case of the prosecution, in short, in that on 28.03.2013, at about 16:00 hours, at Ruabandha, behind Water Tank in bushes, which comes within the ambit of Police Station Bhilai Nagar, Durg (CG), the accused-appellant committed sexual intercourse with the victim (PW-01), knowing full well that she is a pregnant lady and also threatened her to kill and, thereby, said to have committed offences under Section 376(2)(h) & 506-B of IPC. (3) The further case of the prosecution is that when victim (PW- 01) reported the matter to the police by stating that on the date and time of the offence, while she was pregnant and had gone to attend the call of nature behind the Water Tank, at that juncture, the accused-appellant came and forcibly took her towards the bushes, threatened her to kill and committed sexual intercourse with her against her will and consent. On the basis of said report, FIR (Ex.P/01) was registered against the appellant and wheels of investigation started running, in which, nazari naksha was prepared vide Ex.P/05. After obtaining necessary consent vide Ex.P/02, the victim (PW-01) was subjected to medical examination, which was conducted by Dr. Rachna Dave (PW-07) and, as per her MLC report (Ex.P/04) it has been opined that definite opinion Page No.3 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 regarding recent rape with the victim (PW-01) cannot be given, as she is habitual to sexual intercourse, however, looking to her external injuries, there is a possibility of rape. Further, slides of the victim were prepared and handed over to the police alongwith her petticoat for analysis, which was seized vide Ex.P/06 & Ex.P/03 respectively. The accused-appellant was arrested vide Ex.P/16 and sent for medical examination. Appellant’s MLC report is Ex.P/05 and his pant (jeans) was also seized vide Ex.P/07. Further, from the place of occurance, one undergarment of the victim was also seized vide Ex.P/14. The aforesaid seized articles were sent for chemical examination and, as per FSL report (Ex.P/20), it has been mentioned that stains of human sperm/semen were found on the slide of the victim as also on her undergarment and petticoat. Thereafter, statement 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. (4) The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 20 documents, whereas the appellant in support of his defence, though not examined any witness but exhibited 02 documents. Page No.4 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 (5) The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, though acquitted the appellant for offence under Section 506-B of IPC, but proceeded to convict him for offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(h) of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. (6) Mr. K.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned trial Court is absolutely unjustified in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences. The the victim (PW-01) was consenting party and, therefore, her testimony cannot be relied upon. Further,the medical evidence also does not supports the case of the prosecution properly. There is no clear evidence available on record to connect the appellant for the offence in question, therefore, the appellant is entitled for acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt. Hence, the present appeal deserves to be allowed. (7) 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-01), wherein she has clearly narrated the incident and implicated appellant herein to be the author of the Page No.5 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 crime in question, coupled with other evidence available on record i.e. MLC Report of the victims (Ex.P/04) and FSL report (Ex.P/20), the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the offences mentioned herein-above and, therefore, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed. (8) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. (9) In the instant case, considering the statement of victim (PW- 01), wherein he has clearly narrated the incident and implicated the appellant herein to be the author of the crime by stating that on the date and time of the offence, while she was pregnant and had gone to attend the call of nature behind the Water Tank, at that juncture, the accused-appellant came and forcibly took her towards the bushes, threatened her to kill and committed sexual intercourse with her against her will and consent. The victim (PW- 01) was also subjected to lengthy cross-examination, but she remained consistent in her version and, therefore, her testimony inspires confidence and can be relied upon to hold the appellant herein guilty for the offence in question more particularly when it is a case where the victim (PW-02) is a pregnant lady and it is beyond imagination and common thinking that a pregnant lady would say lie before the Court in order to falsely implicate the appellant. Furthermore, the aforesaid statement of the victim (PW-01), mush Page No.6 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 less the prosecution, is also corroborated by other evidence available on record i.e. (i) MLC report (Ex.P/04) of the victim, whereby it is stated that though definite opinion regarding recent rape with the victim (PW-01) cannot be given, as she is habitual to sexual intercourse, however, looking to her external injuries, there is a possibility of rape, which is duly proved and supported by Dr. Rachna Dave (PW-07), who has medically examined the victim (PW- 02) and (ii) FSL report (Ex.P/20), wherein it has clearly been opined that stains of semen/human sperm were found on the slide of the victim as also on her undergarment (seized from the spot) and petticoat. As such, on the basis of aforesaid evidence available on record, I am of the considered opinion that the findings recorded by the learned trial Court that the appellant is guilty of committing rape with the victim (PW-01), who was a pregnant lady, is strictly in accordance with law and, for which, he has rightly been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court. I hereby affirm the said finding and hold that the present appellant is liable to be dismissed being meritless. (10) At this stage, it is informed by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in jail since 31.03.2013 and, might have completely served out his period of incarceration. Accordingly, it is expected that if the appellant has already served out his complete punishment/sentence of 10 years’ RI and paid fine, as awarded by the learned trial Court, he be released from jail Page No.7 of 7 IN CRA-1714-2019 forthwith, if also not required in any other offence/crime. (11) Accordingly, this criminal appeal sans substance and is hereby dismissed. s@if Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge