1 2025:CGHC:4664-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 896 of 2022 Ramesh Kumar Sahu S/o Surit Ram Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Village-Tarashiv, Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda-Bazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent CRA No. 1015 of 2022 Ramnarayan Sahu @ Chhotu S/o Umendra Sahu Aged About 18 Years R/o Tarashiv, Police Station - City Kotwali, Balodabazar District (Revenue And Civil) Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---Appellant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer Incharge Of Police Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar District (Revenue And Civil) Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Appellant- Ramesh Kumar Sahu : Mr.Govind Ram Miri, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Suresh Tandon, Advocate in CRA No.896/2022 BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.01.29 10:32:28 +0530 2 For Appellant- Ramnarayan Sahu For Respondent- State : : Mr.Hemant Gupta, Advocate in CRA No.1015/2022 Mr.Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, CJ 27/01/2025 1. Since the aforesaid two criminal appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment dated 28.05.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar, in Sessions Case No.34/2020, they were clubbed & heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Appellant-Ramesh Kumar Sahu has preferred Criminal Appeal No.896 of 2022 and appellant-Ramnarayan Sahu has preferred Criminal Appeal No.1015 of 2022 under Section 374(2) of the CrPC questioning the impugned judgment dated 28.05.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar, in Sessions Case No.34/2020, by which they have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:- Sl. No. Conviction Sentence 1. Under Section 450 of the IPC RI for five years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month 2. Under Section SI for one year and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in 3 323/34 of the IPC default of payment of fine to further undergo SI for one month 3. Under Section 376D of the IPC RI for twenty years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the victim of the incident is a resident of village Konari, Police Statin Kasdol, but she has been living on rent in the house of Dashrath Patel of village Tarashiv for the last one year and is doing the work of singing Pandvani while living there. There were five members in her team. On the night of the incident dated 01.02.2020, the victim was sleeping in her house after eating dinner, when around 10 P.M Ramesh Patel of village Tarashiv knocked the door of her house, then she first asked from inside the house who is he, then saying that he is Ramesh Sahu, the accused said that he has brought a shal for her, open the door, then she opened the door, then accused Ramesh Sahu, co-accused Dinesh Sahu, Umed Sahu’s son who drives a tractor, all three entered her house and closed the inner door and had physical relations with her despite her protest. During that time, they beat her, due to which she got injuries on her cheeks, back, waist, face and hand. On 02.02.2020 Sunday morning, she told the landlord Dashrath Patel and her daughter Devshree Manikpuri, brother Hemkumar Patel about the incident. The victim first came to village Konari and told her daughter about the incident in detail, then she came to Police Station Balodabazar with her brother and daughter and gave a 4 written report of the incident (Ex.P-1), on which the FIR (Ex.P-2) was registered by the Station House Officer Premlal Dhruv. Spot map was prepared by the investigating officer vide Ex.P-3. Patwari also prepared the spot map vide Ex.P-4. Panchnama was also preapred by the patwari vide Ex.P-5. The consent of the victim was obtained for medical examination vide Ex.P-6. Thereafter, the victim was sent to the District Hospital, Balodabazar for medical examination, where she was examined by Dr.Neha Gangeshri (PW-17) vide Ex.P-7 and opined that all signs in body and private part are that of due to forceful recent (within 72 hrs.) sexual intercourse. Petticoat was also examined by Dr.Neha Gangeshri vide Ex.P-7A. One petticoat stains with human sperm was seized vide Ex.P-8. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC vide Ex.P-9. Test identification parade was conducted vide Ex.P-10 in which only Dashrath was identified by the victim. Slide and swab were seized vide Ex.P-12. One underwear was seized from appellant Ramesh Sahu vide Ex.P-15. One underwear was seized from appellant Ramnarayan Sahu vide Ex.P-16. Appellant Ramesh Kumar Sahu was arrested on 8.2.2020 vide arrest memo Ex.P- 17. Appellant Ramnarayan Sahu was arrested on 8.2.2020 vide arrest memo Ex.P-18. Seized articles slides (Article A), swab (Article B), Petticoat (Article C), underwear seized from appellant Ramesh Kumar Sahu (Article D), underwear seized from appellant Ramnarayan Sahu (Article E) and underwear seized 5 from juvenile Ramsajivan Sahu (Article F) were sent to FSL for chemical examination and as per FSL report (Ex.P-25A), semen stains and human sperm were found in Articles A, D and E and no semen stains and human sperm were found in Articles B, C and F. 4. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balodabazar, who in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Balodabazar, from where the First Additional Sessions Judge, Balodabazar received the case on transfer for trial. 5. The trial Court has framed charges against the appellants under Sections 450, 323/34 and 376D of the IPC. The appellants abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence. 6. In order to establish the charges against the appellants, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses. The statement of the appellants under Section 313 of CrPC were also recorded in which they denied the material appearing against them and stated that they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trail Court has convicted the accused/appellants and sentenced them as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. Hence, these appeals. 7. Mr.Hemant Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant-Ramesh Kumar Sahu in CRA No.896 of 2022 submits that learned trial 6 Court ought to have considered the medical of the victim and the manner in which the report was made and natural behaviour of the victim, which is highly improbable looking to the medical condition of her. The trial Court ought to have considered that it is the case of election revelry and the present appellant was supporter of the opposite candidate, thus, he was falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the victim has not identified the present appellant in test identification period and she has only identified Dashrath, who was acquitted by the trial Court. He also submits that learned trial Court had not appreciated rather neglected that the FSL was not completely proved because whose sperm was found was not done. Thus, the report is not proper and conclusive in nature and based up on that report, no decision could be drawn. Therefore, conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant is not proper and deserves to be set aside. 8. Mr.Govind Ram Miri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Suresh Tandon, learned counsel for appellant-Ramnarayan Sahu @ Chhotu, submits that the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court is perverse and contrary to law. There are many contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which have been overlooked by learned trial Court. He further submits that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubts. Therefore, the 7 alleged offences of the IPC are not made out against the appellant and he is entitled for acquittal. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and contends that the trial Court has correctly appreciated the evidence available on record and has rightly arrived at the finding of guilt of the appellants. The judgment of the trial Court is based on sound and cogent evidence and therefore, there is no error or infirmity in the same. As such, the criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. 10. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and record of the trial Court with utmost circumspection. 11. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, we have examined the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. 12. In the present case, the prosecutrix has been examined as PW-1. In para 1 of her examination-in-chief, she has stated that she recognize accused Ramesh Kumar Sahu and Dashrath Patel. The third accused is son of driver Umendra Sahu whose name is probably Ramnarayan Sahu. She lived in village Tarashiv at the time of the incident. The incident took place about a year ago. On 1st February, 2020 at 10 P.M. on the date of the incident, she had eaten dinner and went to sleep, at that time, someone knocked on the door from outside. She asked who he is. The accused 8 Ramesh said that he is Ramesh Bhabhi, he has come to give shal. After this, another accused Dinesh also asked her to open the door calling her badi maa, then she opened the door. When she turned to switch on the light after opening the door, accused Ramesh, Dinesh and the tractor driver Ramnarayan and Dashrath Patel, who had come with his mouth tied, entered her house and started beating her directly. She was screaming loudly but they beat her a lot on the face, mouth, throat, chest. After this, she was taken to another room and accused Ramesh forcefully made physical relations with her and after this all the three accused made physical relations with her one by one. She fainted due to the pain of physical relations. She regained consciousness at around 12 at night. When she regained consciousness, she went to her neighbour Ganesh Patel’s house. At 12 at night the door of Ganesh Patel’s house was open and Ganesh Patel was sitting on the throne. Ganesh Patel’s house is right next to her house. She told Ganesh Patel the whole incident by telling him the names of four accused. Ganesh Patel said to her what will they do at this time of the night, go to sleep and lock the door from inside. In para 9 of her cross-examination, she has admitted that she has been living on rent in village Tarashiv for about 15- 16 years. She is doing the work of bhajan mandali while staying at home. She has further admitted that she has very god relations with everyone in the villege. She has admitted that she visit the house of her neighbours Ganesh, Saket and Kaushal and they 9 have relations. She has also admitted that she has not had any argument, fight or quarrel with her neighbour Ganesh Patel before or after the incident. She has also admitted that on the date of incident at 12 midnight, her neighbour Ganesh Patel was sitting outside on a platform with other people due to the election. She has also admitted that on the date of incident, the election work was going on and hence, there was a food and drink programme at her neighbour Saket Bai’s house, so she went there to eat. She has denied that due to the election atmosphere, she had consumed a little alcohol on the date of incident. 13. The victim in her 164 CrPC statement (Ex.P-9) has stated that that she has been living in Dashrath Lal Patel’s house in village Tarashiv on rent for about ten years. She is a Pandavani singer. The incident is of 1.2.2020. Two to three days before the incident, campaigning was going for the election of Panch-Sarpanch. People were coming to her house for election campaigning. On 1.2.2020, she was sleeping at night after eating food at home, then three boys started knocking on the door of her house. She started asking from inside the house who he is. Then one boy said he is Ramesh and also said that he has brought shal. Then she opened the door, there were three boys in which Ramesh, Dinesh and Umendra were there and one boy was standing behind, she could not recognize them. She asked them to come inside, at the same time, one boy switched off the light of the front room and after that she saw all three boys made physical 10 relations with her one after other and also beat her up. She has fainted. When she regained consciousness, there were marks of injury and scratches all over the body. She had no clothes on her body. She got up, wrapped herself in a blanket and went to Ganesh Patel’s house and told him about the incident. After that, he came to her house, switched on the lights, locked the house and went to Shakarbai’s house and told her about the incident. She stayed at Shakarbai’s house for the night. The next day in the morning, she went to the village Kotwar’s house. She told Dashrath Lal Patel about the incident. The same day, a panchayat was held in the village. The villagers started pressuring her saying that she is from another village, oust her away from here, she is defaming the boys of their village and the villagers started abusing her. Then she came to her village Konari and called her daughter. Her daughter is married in Amodi. Her daughter came to meet her from her inlaws house. She told her daughter about the incident. After that, they went to the police station to report it at night. 14. Ganesh Ram Patel (PW-6) has admitted in para 4 of his cross- examination that at that time, elections for Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat and Zila Panchayat were being held in their village. He has admitted that voting took place in the village on 3.2.2020. He has also admitted that the incident occurred on 1.2.2020. He has further admitted that on 1.2.2020 he was sitting on a platform outside her house from 12-1 A.M. due to elections. 11 He has also admitted that from 8-9 P.M. to 1 A.M. on 1.2.2020 he did not see three accused going to the victim’s house or coming out of the house. He has also admitted that he know Umesh Sahu who has four sons named Dineshwar, Bhagwat, Kamal Narayan and Ramnarayan. He has also admitted that Kamal Narayan drives a tractor. He has also admitted that he has never seen Umesh’s younger son Ramnarayan driving a tractor. 15. Dr.Neha Gangeshri (PW-17) has conducted genital examination of the victim. She has stated in para 2 of her examination in chief that on genital examination of the victim, she found that the victim was fully conscious and was understanding everything. Her mental condition was normal. There were marks of struggle on her body, which are as follows:- (1) Abrasion wound with contusion present on lower abdomen left side approximately 1 cm x 0.5 cm. (2) Contusion l\seen on public symphysis region approximately 1cm x 1 cm. (3) Contusion present on right side breast 1.5cm x 1cm approximately. (4) Abrasion wound multiple (4) in number on left arm above elbow linear in shape approximately 0.8 cm x 0.2 x 0.1 cm. (5) Abrasion wound over lower lip approximately 0.8cm x 0.2 cm and over forehead 0.1x0.1x0.1cm approximately. 12 In para 3 of her evidence, she has stated that on genital examination of the victim, she found that there was congestion with redness in her vulva which is caused by blood clotting. There was swelling and congestion in the vagina. The hymen was almost absent. In para 4 she has stated that the victim’s body and private parts had signs of forced sexual intercourse. 16. In the written complaint so made by the victim (Ex.P-1), she has written that on the night of the incident dated 01.02.2020, she was sleeping in her house after eating dinner, when around 10 P.M., Ramesh Patel of village Tarashiv knocked the door of her house, then she first asked from inside the house who is he, then saying that he is Ramesh Sahu, the accused said that he has brought a shal for her, open the door, then she opened the door, then accused Ramesh Sahu, co-accused Dinesh Sahu, Umendra Sahu’s son who drives a tractor, all three entered her house and closed the inner door and had physical relations with her despite her protest. During that time, they beat her, due to which she got injuries on her cheeks, back, waist, face and hand. On 02.02.2020 Sunday morning, she told the landlord Dashrath Patel and her daughter Devshree Manikpuri, brother Hemkumar Patel about the incident. In her 164 CrPC statement (Ex.P-9), she has stated that on 1.2.2020, she was sleeping at night after eating food at home, then three boys started knocking on the door of her house. She started asking from inside the house who he is. Then one boy said he is Ramesh and also said that he has brought the 13 shal. Then she opened the door, there were three boys in which Ramesh, Dinesh and Umendra were there and one boy was standing behind, she could not recognize them. She asked them to come inside, at the same time, one boy switched off the light of the front room and after that she saw all three boys made physical relations with her one after other and also beat her up. Moreover, the victim in her test identification parade (Ex.P-10) has only identified Dashrath and has not identified other accused persons and Dashrath has already been acquitted by the trial Court in the impugned judgment. 17. Considering the evidence of the victim (PW-1), especially para 1 of her evidence, evidence of Ganesh Ram Patel (PW-6), evidence of Dr.Neha Gangeshri (PW-17), further considering the written complaint made by the victim herself (Ex.P-1) in which he has not named appellant Ramnarayan Sahu @ Chhotu as Umendra Sahu has four sons namely Dineshwar, Bhagwat, Kamal Narayan & Ramnarayan and her 164 CrPC statement (Ex.P-9) in which also, he has not named accused Ramnarayan Sahu and the victim in her test identification parade (Ex.P-10) has only identified Dashrath and Dashrath has already been acquitted by the trial Court, we are of the considered opinion that the trial Court has committed grave legal error in convicting appellant- Ramnarayan Sahu @ Chhotu for offences under Sections 450, 323/34 and 376D of the IPC as benefit of doubt ought to have been given to him. However, considering the evidence of the 14 victim (PW-1), evidence of Dr.Neha Gangeshri (PW-17), furhter considering the written complaint made by the victim herself (Ex.P-1) in which he has named appellant Ramesh Kumar Sahu specifically as also in her 164 CrPC statement (Ex.P-9), we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has proved that on the fateful day, appellant Ramesh Kumar Sahu has forcibly committed rape on the victim and also assaulted her. 18. For the foregoing reasons, Criminal Appeal No.896/2022 filed on behalf of appellant-Ramesh Kumar Sahu is partly allowed. His conviction and sentence under Section 450 of the IPC are hereby maintained. His conviction under Sections 323/34 and 376D of the IPC are hereby set aside, however, he is convicted under Section 323 and 376 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo SI for one year and fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 323 of the IPC and RI for ten years and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. He is reported to be in jail since 8.2.2020, he shall serve out the sentence as modified by this Court. 19. However, Criminal Appeal No.1015/2022 filed on behalf of appellant-Ramnarayan Sahu @ Chhotu is allowed and his conviction & sentence under Sections 450, 323/34 and 376D of the IPC are hereby set aside. The appellant is reported to be in jail since 8.2.2020. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case. 15 20. Keeping in view of the provisions of Section 437-A CrPC (Now Section 481 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), appellant-Ramnarayan Sahu@ Chhotu is directed to furnish a personal bonds in terms of from No.45 prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure of sum of Rs.25000/- with 2 reliable sureties in the like amount before the Court concerned which shall be effective for a period of six months alongwith an undertaking that in the event of filing of special leave petition against the instant judgment or for grant of leave, the aforesaid appellant on receipt of notice thereon shall appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 21. The trial Court record alongwith the copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action. 22. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail term, to serve the same on the appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of the High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu