1 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 2025:CGHC:16997 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1685 of 2023 [Arising out of judgment dated 13.04.2023 passed in Sessions Trial No.10/2020 by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.]  Shrikant Yadav S/o Nehrulal Yadav, aged about 24 years, R/o Village Sanjay Nagar, Kharsiya, P.S. Kharsiya, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus  State of Chhattisgarh through - Station House Officer, Police Station Kharsiya, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant :- Mr. C.K. Sahu, Advocate / Panel Lawyer appointed by Chhattisgarh High Court Legal Services Committee. For State-Respondent :- Dr. S.K. Dewangan, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 11/04/2025 1. Assail in the present criminal appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the CrPC preferred by the sole appellant-accused, is ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.04.16 17:18:04 +0530 2 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 to the legality, validity and correctness of the judgment dated 13.04.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 10/2020 by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offence under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to go rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of 15,000/-; in default of payment of fine amount the ₹ appellant has to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for 60 days. Prosecution story:- 2. The case of the prosecution as projected by the prosecution and accepted by the trial Court is that between 25.09.2018 to 30.06.2019, for a period of 10 months, on the pretext of marriage the appellant committed repeatedly intercourse with the victim (PW-4) against her wish. Against the said act of the appellant the victim (PW-4) made written complaint (Ex.P/1) on 30.07.2019 pursuant to which on the same day FIR was lodged against the present appellant vide Ex.P/2. Crime details form and Nazari naksha were prepared vide Exs.P/5 & P/6, respectively. Wheels of investigation started 3 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 running and the appellant was arrested. Victim was medically examined by Dr. Kiran Chouhan (PW-8) who prepared the victim’s medical report vide Ex.P/12. As per the victim’s medical report (Ex.P/12) proved by Dr. Kiran Chouhan (PW-8), internal and external injuries were not found, hymen was found ruptured, old and healed; victim was found to be habitual in intercourse and no sign of recent intercourse was found. Slides of the victim were prepared and sent it for chemical analysis to FSL. In the FSL report dated 16.10.2019 stains of semen and human sperm were not found. 3. After due investigation, appellant was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offence and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant / accused abjured his guilt and entered into defence. 4. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited 19 documents, whereas, the appellant in defence has neither examined any witness nor exhibited any 4 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 document. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence brought on record, pleaded innocence and false implication. 5. The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, convicted the appellant for the offence as mentioned in the opening paragraph of the judgment, against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellant herein questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Submission of the parties:- 6. Mr. C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the crime in question. He would also submit that the victim was major at the time of incident and even she was a consenting party which appears from her statement. He would further submit that the there is no medical and FSL report against the appellant, therefore, the appellant is entitled for acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt. 5 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 7. Dr. S.K. Dewangan, learned State counsel, would submit that the prosecution has been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the Special Court has rightly convicted the appellant for offence in question as the victim has clearly supported the case of the prosecution, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for acquittal and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. Discussion and analysis:- 9. Admittedly, there is no dispute that the victim was major at the time of offence. As per the statement of the victim (PW-4), the appellant made repeatedly physical relationship with her (PW-4) on the pretext of marriage, even the appellant lived with her (PW-4) for about 9 months and at that time she (PW- 4) became pregnant and due to which she was subjected to abortion. In view of the aforesaid statement of the victim, the appellant was convicted for offence in question, however, it is 6 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 the case of the appellant that the victim was a consenting party. 10. A careful perusal of statement of the victim (PW-4) would show that she was the consenting party as she had been residing with the appellant in different tenanted accommodation from time to time. It would further appear that incident took place between 25.09.2018 to 30.06.2019 and for a period of about 10 months, she (PW-4) did not report the matter to the police and matter was reported on 30.07.2019, as such, the delay has occurred which has not been satisfactorily explained by the prosecution. Even otherwise, in her statement before the Court she has clearly admitted that the appellant did not want to compromise and to marry with her, due to which, she made a complaint against the present appellant. Thus, it would be unsafe to base the conviction of the appellant on the basis of statement of the victim (PW-4) as she was major at the time of offence and also appears to be consenting party. In shape of corroboration, the prosecution has relied upon the medical report of the victim (Ex.P/12). However, in the medical report (Ex.P/12) proved by Dr. 7 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 Kiran Chouhan (PW-8), internal and external injuries were not found, only hymen was found ruptured, old and healed and no sign of recent intercourse was found. Even otherwise, in the FSL report dated 16.10.2019 on the slides of the victim (articles A & B) stains of semen and human sperm were not found. As such, the appellant is entitled for acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt. Conclusion:- 11. In view of the aforesaid discussion and analysis, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Court is liable to be and is hereby set aside. The appellant stands acquitted of the charges for offence in question. He is stated to be in jail from 01.08.2019 to 29.08.2019; from 02.07.2022 to 09.09.2022 and since 13.04.2023. I direct him to be set at liberty forthwith, if his detention is not required in any other offence. 12. This criminal appeal is allowed. 13. Let a certified copy of this judgment along with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned and the 8 CRA No. 1685 of 2023 copy of this judgment be sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is lodged and suffering jail sentence, forthwith for information and necessary action, if any. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit