1 2025:CGHC:45808-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 58 of 2018 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Chowki Sonkyari, Police Station- Sanna, District- Jashpur (CG) ... Appellant versus Ganesh @ Shivshanker Ganesh S/o Shri Krishna Ram, Aged About 19 Years, Caste Uraon, R/o- Lamuraha, Chowki Sonkyari, Police Station- Sanna, District- Jashpur (CG) ---- Respondent ____________________________________________________________________ For Appellant/State : Shri Ruhul Ameen, Panel Lawyer For Respondent : Ms. Binu Sharma, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment On Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 09.09.2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 22.03.2017 passed by the Special Judge (under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) and Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.),Jashpur(CG) in Sessions Trial No.27/2016, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted with SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.09.10 10:40:57 +0530 2 regard to the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 (2)(n) of IPC read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 14.09.2016, the prosecutrix, who was 17 years and 4 months old, had gone to the Weekly Market along with her friend at 10.00 am, for purchasing vegetables and clothes, but did not return by the evening and in the night, said friend of the prosecutrix came and narrated the incident to her father that the respondent has abducted her and, while alluring her on the pretext of marriage, has committed the sexual intercourse with her and, based upon the alleged allegations, the respondent has been charge-sheeted with the regard to the offence mentioned herein-above. 3. In order to establish the alleged allegations, the prosecutrix was examined as PW-5, but from perusal of her testimony, it appears that on the said fateful day, i.e. on 14.09.2016, she went to the Weekly Market, where, she has seen her maternal-uncle and thereafter, she went along with him to his house. It reveals further from her testimony that she did not meet with the respondent in the said Weekly Market, nor was taken by him to his house, while alluring her on the pretext of marriage, nor has committed sexual intercourse with her. That apart, although, it was alleged by the prosecution that on the date of the alleged incident, she was 17 years and 4 months old, but, from the testimony of her parents, who were examined as PW-3 and PW-4, it, however, appears that she was more than 18 years of age. No cogent and reliable evidence has, thus, been led by the prosecution, 3 attributing the respondent for the commission of the alleged crime and, the trial Court, after taking note of those materials, has not committed any illegality in acquitting him from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 4. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE JUDGE sunita