1 (CRA No. 2274 of 2023) 2025:CGHC:11525 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2274 of 2023 1 - Rambhajan Ram @ Bhothi S/o Radheram, Aged About 26 Years Caste Bargah R/o. Nawgi Police Station Darima, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Darima, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant :- Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate For State :- Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 07.03.2025 1. This criminal appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.09.2023, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) (POCSO Act), Ambikapur, District – Surguja, Chhattisgarh in Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No.25/2021 (State v. Rambhajan Ram @ Bhothi), whereby he has been convicted ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.03.12 11:54:01 +0530 2 (CRA No. 2274 of 2023) for offences as under :- Conviction Sentence U/s 354 of IPC R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs. 500/- and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month. U/s 7/8 of POCSO Act, 2012 R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs. 500/- and, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 01 month. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 29.01.2021 at around 9:30 AM at Village – Khajuri, Chatakpur, Police Station – Darima, District - Surguja, the appellant herein outraged the modesty of the victim (PW-01) and, thereby, have committed the aforesaid offences. 3. The trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences under Section 354 of IPC and U/s 7/8 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced him as above, against which the present appeal has been preferred. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has not been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and as such, the trial Court has erred in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences. He further submits that the appellant has already served the jail sentence and has been released from jail. 3 (CRA No. 2274 of 2023) 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would support the impugned judgment and submit that the prosecution has been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence; therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the materials available on record with utmost circumspection. 7. Taking into consideration the finding of the learned trial Court, particularly the statements of the victim (PW-1), her mother (PW-2) and her grandfather (PW-3) that the appellant has sexually assaulted the complainant is a correct finding of fact based on the evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. Even otherwise, the appellant has already served the jail sentence and has been released from jail, as such, I do not find it a fit case for interference and, accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!