1 2025:CGHC:38799 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 117 of 2021 State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ...Appellant versus Sanju Kumar Verma S/o. Mansukh Verma, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Rivagahan, P.S. Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent _____________________________________________________________ For Appellant :Shri Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer For Respondent :Ms.Komal Yadav, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Judgment On Board 05.08.2025 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 18.01.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (CG) in Special Sessions Trial No.12/2019, whereby, the respondent has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 354-A SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.08.05 18:21:01 +0530 2 (1)(i) and 452 of IPC read with Sections 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. From perusal of the record, it appears that on account of the incident occurred on 05.07.2019, a written report (Ex.P-2) was lodged by the prosecutrix’s father on 06.07.2019, before the Police Station, Khairagarh, alleging therein, that on the said fateful day, i.e. 05.07.2019 around 5.15 pm, when his daughter was alone at home, the respondent came and knocked the door and when she opened, he caught hold of her and dragged her inside the room in order to outrage her modesty and she, somehow, escaped herself from the clutches of him and came out from the house, while shouting and informed her brother regarding the occurrence of the alleged incident and, the respondent, by the time, fled away from the spot. 3. In order to establish the alleged allegations, the prosecutrix was examined as PW-6 and, it appears from her testimony that on the said fateful day, she was alone at home, as her parents’ have gone somewhere else and, at that particular time, the respondent came and knocked the door and asked about her parents and when she informed that they are not at home, he immediately caught hold of her and dragged her inside the room in order to outrage her modesty and, deposed further that she, somehow, escaped herself and came out while shouting and informed her brother regarding the alleged incident. It is to be seen at this juncture that on account of the alleged incident, she was examined by Dr. Vivek Bisen (PW-8) on 06.07.2019, who vide his report (Ex.P-8) found certain injuries on her, caused by hard and 3 blunt object though, simple in nature, but, in her cross-examination, para 12, it was, however, stated that she has not sustained any injury. Her statement is, therefore, not found to be trustworthy. Even otherwise, as appears from the report, lodged by her father, vis-a-vis, her statement, she had informed the occurrence of the alleged incident immediately to her brother but, for the reasons best known to the prosecution, he was not examined, nor even the vicinities were examined, though shouted at the relevant point of time, in order to establish or corroborate her version. 4. In view of the aforesaid background, the trial Court, after taking note of those materials, has, therefore, not committed any illegality in not accepting her version, while acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 5. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE sunita