1 2025:CGHC:14158 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 102 of 2020 1 - Deenanath Korwa S/o Shri Ramsewak Korwa Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Ucharwa, Police Station Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Atul Gond, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Judgment on Board 24/03/2025 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.01.2020 passed by learned Upper Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Sessions Case No. 15/2018 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in following manner :- 2 Conviction U/S Sentence Fine In default of payment of Fine u/S 450 of Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years Rs. 1,000/- Additional R. I. for 03 months u/S. 376 (2)(j) of Indian Penal Code Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years Rs. 1,000/- Additional R.I. for 03 months U/S. 506 part-II of the IPC Rigorous imprisonment for 02 years Rs. 500/- Additional R. I. for one month. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim was a married lady and she was carrying pregnancy of about 7 months and since her husband left her, she was residing at her maternal anut's (Bua) house at village Ucharwa, P.S. Ramchandrapur. On 09.11.2017, at about 4 pm. when she was alone in her house, the appellant came there and asked for tobacco, when she denied that she is not having tobacco, he dragged her inside her house and committed rape upon her. When she shouted and protested the act of the appellant, he threatened her for dire consequences. After commission of offence, the appellant fled away from the place. When her parents came back to house from the jungle, she informed the incident to them. On 10.11.2017, in the morning a village meeting was also convened and she disclosed the incident there also and then she lodged the report. On the report of victim (PW-1), FIR (Ex.P-6) was registered against the appellant for the offence under Sections 294, 506, 376(2) (n) and 450 of the IPC. The victim was sent for her medical examination to Community Health Centre, Ramanujganj, where Dr. Kamini Rai (PW-3) medically examined the victim and gave her report (Ex.P-1). During her medical examination, doctor has noticed 3 that victim was carrying pregnancy of about 28 weeks. No injuries have been found on her body and opined that no definite opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse can be given at present and she referred to Sonologist , DHA for further examination of gestational age of fetus, however, two slides of her vaginal swab were prepared, sealed and handed it over to police for its chemical examination. Spot map (Ex.P-7) was prepared by the police and spot map (Ex.P-5) was prepared by the Patwari. The appellant was arrested on 12.11.2017 and he too was sent for his medical examination to Community Health Centre, Ramanujganj where Dr. Kailash Kaiwartya (PW-6) medically examined him and gave his report (Ex.P-4). After examining the appellant, the Doctor has opined that he is capable to perform sexual intercourse. Petticoat of the victim and her vaginal slides were sent for its chemical examination to Regional FSL, Ambikapur from where report (Ex.P-18) was received and as per FSL report semen and sperm were found on the patticoat of the victim, however, no semen and sperm were found on the vaginal slides of the victim. Statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. and statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have been recorded. After completion of usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramanujganj for the offence under Sections 294, 506, 450 & 376 (2)( n) of the IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Balrampur, place Ramanujganj from where the same has been transfred to the learned trial Court for its trial. 3. The trial Court has framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Sections 450, 376 (2)(h), 506 part II and 294 of the IPC. The appellant denied the charged and claimed trial. 4 4. In order to prove the charge against the accused/appellant, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses. The statement of accused was also recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the material appearing against him, plead innocence and stated that he has purchased the property from Mahendra Korwa and he tried to sell it to other person, for which, Rs.10,000/- was demanded and on that issue, quarrel took place, resultantly, he has been falsely implicated in the case. Two defence witnesses have been examined by the appellant in his favour. 5. After appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence led by the prosecution, learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced him as mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the prosecution has failed to prove its’ case beyond reasonable doubts. There are material omission and contradiction in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which cannot be made basis for his conviction. There is no witness, who have seen the appellant nearby the house of the victim, even as per allegations raised by the victim that she raised alarm at the time of incident, but no-one had come there to rescue her, despite that her house is situated in a dance locality. No injuries have been found on her body and there is reason for false implication that her maternal aunt and uncle were having grudge against the accused/appellant, as there was dispute in respect of purchase of the property. In a village, a Panchayat meeting was also convened some days prior to the date of alleged incident. No semen and sperm were found on her vaginal slides, which falsify the allegations against the appellant that he committed rape upon her. Evidence of the victim suffers with material discrepancies and inconsistencies, therefore, the appellant is entitled for acquittal. 5 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State while opposing the arguments advanced by the counsel for the appellant contended that the except minor contradictions & omissions, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are overwhelming evidence available in the record against the appellant. The evidence of the victim (PW02) itself is sufÏcient to hold guilty of the offence. Even if no injuries have been found on the body of the victim, the prosecution case cannot be doubted, as injuries is not required in every case to be found on the body of the victim of rape. From the evidence of the victim, it appears that she raised alarm immediately when the appellant entered into her house, but it depends upon the situation as to hearing of the noise by the person, who may have come to rescue her and it also depends upon the situation of her house. From the spot map (Ex.P-7), it also reflects that though the house of the victim is situated in a dance locality, but spot map shows that there is some distance in between the house of the victim as well as house of the others. He submits that immediately after the incident, the report has been lodged. From the perusal of oral evidence of two witnesses, it reflects that property dispute could not be established by the appellant, that too, the alleged property dispute was with her maternal uncle and maternal aunt. Semen and sperm were found on the petticoat of the victim, which also connects the appellant with the crime in question, therefore, there are sufÏcient evidence to hold conviction of the appellant in crime in question, hence, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record of the court below. 9. Victim (PW-1) has stated in her evidence that on the date of incident at about 3 pm, when she was alone in her house and working in her courtyard, 6 appellant came there, asked for tobacco from her and when she refused that she is not having tobacco, he insisted her to go to her house and bring tobacco, when she denied, the appellant dragged her inside her house and thereafter committed rape upon her. During incident, she shouted but no- one came there to help her. Appellant threatened her not to raise her voice, or else she would be killed. After commission of offence, appellant fled away from the place. In the evening, when her parents came from jungle, she disclosed the incident to them and in the next morning, a Panchayat Meeting was called and in the said Panchayat Meeting, appellant & his parents were not come and, therefore, the report has been lodged. In cross-examination, she admitted that in her police statement, she disclosed that she came to her parents' house from her house of her husband for her delivery. She denied the fact that her maternal uncle had borrowed Rs. 10,000/- from the appellant for his treatment, she voluntarily stated that her maternal uncle has done his work in the house of the appellant and Rs.1,200/- was the outstanding amount and he has not given it to him. There was dispute between the appellant and her maternal uncle with respect to the said amount of Rs.1,200/-. In her entire cross-examination, she was cross- examined on the point of her marriage, reasons of residing with her parents and also with respect to money dispute between her maternal uncle and the appellant. 10. So far as offence of rape is concerned, it has not been properly defended by the appellant to say that the appellant has not committed offence of rape with the victim. From her evidence, it has duly been proved the fact that on the date of incident, appellant came to her house, dragged her inside the room and committed rape upon her. At that time, she was caring pregnancy. 11. Dr. Kamini Rai (PW-3), who has medically examined the victim, has proved MLC report (Ex.P-1), in which, she opined that the victim was 7 carrying pregnancy of about 7 months on 11.11.2017, when she was brought before her for her medical examination, althought, she has not noticed any external injuries on her body. 12. PW-2 has stated in his evidence that on the date of incident maternal aunt of the victim has informed him about the incident of rape by the appellant upon the victim. She called village meeting and when they gathered for the said meeting, the appellant had not come there and when 2-3 persons again went to the house of the appellant, then he came alongwith them and he confessed that he has done the wrong act with the victim and they may do whatever they want to do and, thereafter, the persons, appeared in the village meeting, had advised her to lodge the report against the appellant. In cross-examination, this witness too remain firms in same direction that in the village meeting, appellant came there and confessed his guilt, and, thereafter, he members, who came in the meeting, were advised her to lodge the report. 13. PW-4 , who is maternal aunt (Bua) of the victim, has supported the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, when she returned back to her house, the victim had informed the incident to her. In the next morning, village meeting was called and the appellant was also there in the village meeting, where, the appellant has confessed his guilt for committing rape upon the victim, thereafter, member of the meeting had advised her to lodge the report. In cross-examination, she was being cross-examined on the point of amount borrowed by her husband from the appellant, but she denied the same. Further, she remained firm in saying that in the next day morning, a village meeting was convened and in that meeting the appellant had confessed his guilt in the said meeting. 14. PW-8, who is maternal uncle of the victim, has too supported the case of the prosecution and stated in his evidence that when they returned from the 8 jungle, victim informed him about the incident and in the next morning, a village meeting was called, in which, the appellant confessed his guilt, thereafter, a report has been lodged. In his cross-examination also, nothing specific has come, which makes the entire case of the prosecution doubtful. 15. Though the appellant has examined two defence witnesses, but from the evidence of defence witness it only comes that there was property dispute between the appellant and the maternal uncle of the victim, but there is no specific date & time of the said dispute and also the nature of dispute, it only comes that in the year 2017, a village meeting was called with respect to the property dispute between the appellant and the maternal uncle of the victim (PW-8). 16. In absence of any clinching evidence with respect to the property dispute between them merely saying that there was a dispute with respect to the property between maternal uncle of the victim and the appellant would not sufÏcient to discard the evidence of victim as well as other witnesses. 17. A close scrutiny of evidence makes it clear that on the date of incident when the victim, who is a married lady, was alone in her house, appellant entered into her house, dragged her inside the room and committed raped upon her. Thus, the judgment passed by the trial Court is based on proper appreciation of the evidence available on record, this Court does not find any sufÏcient ground to upset the well reasoned finding recorded by the trial Court. 18. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. The appellant shall serve the entire sentence, as awarded to him by the trial Court. 19. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail sentences 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 9 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. 20. The trial Court record along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial court concerned for compliance and necessary action. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge amita Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.04.08 11:17:37 +0530