1 2025:CGHC:41543 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 477 of 2016 Prasottam Singh @ Nan Guddu S/o Late Ramchandra Singh Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Jaroundha Pateratola, Police Station Khadganwa, District Korea, Civil & Revenue District Korea, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khadganwa, District Korea, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.C.S. Deo, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru Judgment on Board 18/08/2025 1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C is against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.08.25 10:51:07 +0530 2 14.03.2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 06/2015 by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, District Koriya, C.G., whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:- Conviction Sentence U/s 376 of IPC Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 26.09.2014, the victim lodged a report against the accused Prasottam Singh in the Khargawan police station to the effect that on 25.09.2014 at about 2.00 pm when the victim had gone to pluck corn in her field and further she was going to the field of her brother-in-law. At that time, her nephew Prasottam Singh, who was a distant relative, met her near the Mahua tree and caught hold of the victim and dragged her towards the Arhar field and threw the victim on the ground and raped her. The victim raised alarm, then her husband Devlal came but the accused fled from the spot. Then she told the whole incident to her husband and called other villagers and told them also. After discussing at night, she came to lodge a report of the incident. On the report of the victim, a case was registered against the accused by Khargawan police station and investigation was taken up. The police authorities took the action to seize the clothes regarding incident and the same were sent for chemical examination. 3. During investigation, Spot Map (Ex.P/7) was prepared. Statement of the Victim and the Statements of witnesses were recorded. Subsequently after completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted before 3 the Court. 4. After framing the charges against the accused/appellant, the charges were read out and explained to the appellant, he denied committing the crime and demanded trial. 5. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined 14 witnesses in its support. Statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein he has pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter. 6. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record, by its judgment dated 14.03.2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the conviction against the appellant is bad in law and it is not supported by the evidence of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. He would submit that while passing the impugned judgment the trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. He would submit that the medical report is not supported the version of the prosecution. He would further submit that being major, the prosecutrix is a consenting party. Learned counsel would submit that without there being any cogent evidence, the conviction of the appellant is bad in the eyes of law. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made 4 by the counsel for the appellant and submits that the conviction of the appellant is well merited which does not call for any interference. Therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection. 10. It is an admitted fact that the victim in the present matter is a major married woman proper fit and sound health condition and very much capable to take her own decisions, hence besides the other material facts, the first question arises before this Court whether the accused committed rape upon the victim or not. 11. The victim was examined as PW/5 who stated in her statement that the incident took place about a year ago. When she was answering the nature’s call at that time, the accused came there, caught her hand, dragged her, threw her down and raped her. Due to which she got injuries on her cheek and hand. Thereafter she went to her house and informed her husband Devlal about the incident. They called 2-4 persons from the village and went to the police station and lodged a report of the incident. Whereas in her cross-examination, she categorically stated that she cannot tell the date, month and day of the incident. She stated that the orchard where she had gone to pluck ‘Rahar’ is adjacent to her house. She admitted the fact that when the accused was taking her away, she did not shout and went with him silently. She further stated that no 5 one had reached the spot at the time of the incident. She voluntarily stated that after the incident she went to her house and the accused also went to his house and after reaching her house, she told her husband about the incident. She also stated that at the time of incident, she does not move her hands and legs to resist the accused and also admitted the fact that her clothes were not torn. 12. PW/6- Devlal, who is husband of the victim stated in his statement that the incident occurred about a year ago. When he came out of his house at around 2 pm, he saw that the accused was forcefully raping his wife in his elder brother's farm. At that time, he went with a stick to catch the accused, but he fled from the spot and he could not catch him. He further stated that when his wife came back home, she told him that the accused had raped her forcefully. Thereafter he told other villagers from the neighbourhood about the incident, then they went to lodge a report regarding the incident. 13. PW/4- Dr. Swapnil Wilson, Medical Officer, Medical College, Raigarh, who conducted the medical examination of the victim, stated in her statement that, she found a dried scratch on the right cheek up to the ear in the external examination of the victim. Apart from this, there was no other external injury on any part of her body. On her internal examination, there were no internal injuries in her genitals, two fingers were easily entering the vagina. This witness has given this opinion after examination that the victim was habitual to sexual intercourse. This witness also stated that after examination, she prepared two slides from 6 the vagina of the victim and handed over the same to the police authorities, advising them to prepare the chemical test report. Regarding the injury found on the cheek, she has admitted in her cross-examination that the injury on the victim’s cheek could have been caused by a corn cob. The witness also admitted the fact that the injury on the victim's cheek could have been self-inflicted. 14. Upon considering the entire evidence available on record, this Court found that there are major contradictions and omissions in the statement of the Victim, which does not inspire confidence over the credibility of her statement because she had given police statement contradictory to her statement given before the trial Court, which in the opinion of this Court, seems unreliable. 15. Upon cumulative analysis of the above statements and medical evidence, it appears that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the witnesses. It is very improbable to accept the fact that the prosecutrix when raped by the accused, she did not disclose the said fact to her husband who was present at the time of incident as he himself admitted in his statement that he was chasing the accused, rather she stated that after occurrence of incident she went home and told her husband, this type of contradictory statement lost credence in the eyes of the Court. As far as injury mark on the victim's cheek is concerned, the doctor (PW/4) has categorically opined that the said injury mark could have been caused by a corn cob or could have been self-inflicted. 16. In the absence of evidence to prove that the accused has committed rape, 7 the prosecution's case is significantly weakened. The lack of evidence in this regard raises reasonable doubt about the accused's involvement in the alleged offence. In criminal anticipation, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Without any evidence to substantiate the charge of rape, it becomes challenging for the prosecution to meet this burden. The Court would need to carefully consider the absence of evidence and its implications on the prosecution's case, potentially leading to the benefit of doubt being given to the accused. 17. For the foregoing reasons, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the prosecution witnesses did not support the version of the prosecution, therefore, I am of the view that the appellant is entitled to be acquitted. 18. The accused is acquitted of the charges for which he was tried. The appellant is reported to be on bail. His bail bonds are not discharged at this stage and the bonds shall remain operative for a period of six months in view of Section 481 of the BNSS. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. 19. 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/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge $ Bhilwar/ Gowri