1 2025:CGHC:14240 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 382 of 2021 1 - Sanjay Bansfod S/o Ajay Bansfod Aged About 21 Years R/o Atal Awas, Baigapara Lakholi, Ward No. 32, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Judgment on Board 25/03/2025 Heard. 1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25/02/2021 passed in Criminal (POCSO) Case No.39/2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.04.12 15:33:16 +0530 2 Conviction Sentence Under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code. R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.2000/- Under Section 506 of Indian Penal Code. R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs.1000/- Under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.2000/- Under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.2000/- In default of payment of fine amount 3 months additional R.I. for each offence. All the sentences will run concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 06-07-2019 at about 9:30 in front of the Government Secondary School situated in Rajnandgaon area, the accused caught hold of the hand of the victim and pulled her and in the past also the accused used to follow the victim continuously, in relation to which the victim filed a written complaint before the City Kotwali Rajnandgaon, and the First Information Report was registered under Crime No. 382/2019 of the Police Station under Section 354 (b) of the Code and Section 8 of the Act, and the spot map of the incident was prepared, and the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and the statements of the victim and witnesses were recorded, and the mark sheet and the Dakhil Kharij register were seized in relation to the age of the victim, and the accused was arrested, 3 and after the completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was presented before the court against the accused under the said sections. 3. After completing the investigation charge-sheet was filed and after committal of the case during the trial appellant abjured the guilt and in order to prove the case the prosecution has examined as many as 8 witnesses and exhibited 16 documents. The appellant in his examination recorded under Section 313 CRPC stated that he has been falsely implicated and has not adduced any evidence. After completion of trial, the learned trial Court after evaluating the evidence convicted the appellant and sentenced him as supra. Hence this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is contradiction and omission in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. He would next contend that the prosecution has failed to prove the age of the prosecutrix because the mark-sheet of Class 2 has been seized by the prosecution but at the time of evidence that particular original mark-sheet has not been produced. He would lastly contend that the order of the trial Court requires interference by this Court and the same deserves to be set aside and the appellant may be acquitted of the charges leveled against him. 5. On the other hand learned State counsel would submit that the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record. He would further submit that on the date of incident the victim was about 12 Years & 11 Months and the said fact was duly proved. So the judgment is well merited which does not require any interference. 4 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Victim (PW1) has clearly stated in her statement that she studies in class 9 in a government pre-secondary school. The school is open from 12:00 to 5:00 from Monday to Friday and from 7:00 to 12:00 on Saturday. The incident took place 5 months ago. When she used to go to her school, the accused Sanjay used to follow her and say that he love her and would pick her up anytime and also used to extend threat of dire consequences on being disclosed to anyone about this. Due to this, she did not tell anyone about this out of fear. The victim has further stated in her examination-in-chief that on Saturday, 06.07.2019, when she went to school, during recess, when she had gone to buy Kurkure, the accused caught hold her hand and asked her to walk with him, then she freed her hand and went inside the school and told her grandparents about the incident, after which she came to the police station and lodged a written complaint Ex.P-1. 8. The grandmother of the victim (PW2) has also supported the statements of the victim in her examination-in-chief and has alleged that the accused used to follow the victim, intimidate the victim, tell the victim "I love you, marry me or else I will elope and take her away" and used to show her a knife. This witness has also alleged in her examination- in-chief that on Saturday, the victim had gone to school and when she came out of the school to urinate, the accused followed the victim and started pulling her hand and said that he would elope and take her away. Then the victim freed her hand and went to her school. When the victim 5 came home from school, she was very scared and the victim gave her full details of the incident. Then she informed her husband about the incident and went to the police station and lodged a report. 9. The grandfather of the victim (PW-04) has stated in his examination-in- chief that on the date of the incident the victim had gone to school and during recess she came out of the school to buy Kurkure at that time the accused forcibly caught the hand of the victim and was pulling her. The victim freed her hand and came back to school. The accused caught the hand of the victim saying that he would take her with him. The victim came home and informed him about the incident. The accused came home and asked these people to get the victim married to him, then these people refused and the accused had said that if she did not marry him, he would kill the victim with a knife, in connection with which he had gone with the victim to register a report of the incident. 10. Neighbour of the victim (PW3) in her examination-in-chief stated that the victim came crying from the school and on being asked, the victim told that the accused had caught her hand and was saying that he loves her, go with him and also told that the accused follows her everyday. 11. Perused the statement of the victim about the incident, such fact was unrebutted in the cross-examination and the testimony of the victim is found fully reliable and the said fact was also not challenged by the learned counsel for the appellant. 6 12. For the sake of brevity Section 7 & 8 of the Act, 2012 is reproduced herein below:- “7. Sexual Assault.- Whoever, with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child or makes the child touch the vagina, penis, anus or breast of such person or any other person, or does any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact without penetration is said to commit sexual assault.” 8. Punishment for Sexual assault.- Whoever, commits sexual, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine. 13. On closely examining and scrutinizing the evidence of the victim, I find that the victim herself has given the evidence that the appellant caught hold of her hand and pulled her and in the past also the accused used to follow the victim continuously, thus the basic ingredients to attract the offence under Section 7 of the Act, 2012 is missing in the instant case. Therefore, accordingly the conviction recorded by the learned trial Court is liable to be interfered. The appellant is acquitted for the charges under Section 8 of the POCSO and the conviction recorded under Section 354, 506 of the IPC and under Section 12 of the Act, 2012 is hereby maintained. 14. As regards the quantum of sentence under Section 354, 506 of the IPC and under Section 12 of the Act, 2012, considering the fact that the appellant is the first offender and there is no previous antecedents to the credit of the present appellant and the appellant has already undergone 02 Years and 5 Months of substantive sentence imposed by trial Court, 7 this Court is of the opinion that The appellant having already remained in jail for about 02 Years and 5 Months i.e. from 25/02/2021 to 04/07/2023 the above sentence already suffered by the appellant is considered adequate for the offences as alleged against him. It is also to be mentioned that there is no previous criminal record of the appellant and he has only caught hold of the hand of the prosecutrix. 15. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part while maintaining the conviction of appellant under Sections 354, 506 IPC and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and his substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by him. The appellant is on bail, his bail bonds stands cancelled and the sureties stand discharged. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu