1 2025:CGHC:18002 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No.62 of 2020 Heera Bai D/o Ashok Kumar Banjare Aged About 25 Years Resident Of Village - Kishungarh, District -Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh (victim) ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station, Pandaria, District- Kabirdham,Chhattisgarh 2 - Mannu Ram Ratre S/o Ramdas Ratre Aged About 29 Years Resident Of Village - Nanapuri, Police Station - Kunda, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh (Accused) ... Respondents For Appellant : Shri Santosh Bharat, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Anuradha Jain, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board 21.04.2025 1. This Acquittal Appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C has been preferred by the victim (PW-1) against the judgment dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Kabirdham in Sessions Trial No.05/2019 whereby, the Respondent/accused has been acquitted of the offence under Section 376 IPC. Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2025.04.23 11:09:37 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution is that victim (PW-1) aged about 25 years has lodged a written complaint on 22.12.2017 before PS Pandariya alleging that her marriage was solemnized with one Panchu, resident of village Dullapur and out of the said relation, two children were born. Thereafter, on account of a matrimonial conflict, NksM NqV~Vh/social custom was initiated by Panchu and they got separated. Later on victim (PW-1) has started residing with her parents at their village and developed a love relation with the brother of her sister-in-law, who is Respondent No.2 herein. Thereafter, when she was going to be tied knot, the Respondent/accused obstructed and made her stay at his home, but later on, as his mother has twisted his arm, he ousted her from his home, therefore, FIR has been registered against him. 3. After completing the investigation, charge sheet has been filed and the Respondent/accused has abjured his guilt and came to be tried. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses and the statement of the Respondent/accused has been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C in which, he has stated that he has been falsely implicated and not examined any witness in defence. 4. The trial Court, after evaluating the evidence available on record, has acquitted the Respondent/accused. Hence, this Appeal has been filed by the victim (PW-1). 5. Shri Bharat submits that the trial Court has not appreciated the facts and evidence of the case in its proper perspective and prays to allow the Appeal. 3 6. Alternatively, Ms. Jain supports the contentions made by Shri Bharat. 7. Heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused the documents annexed with the Appeal as also gone through the judgment under challenge carefully. 8. It is categorically a case of consent as the victim (PW-1) is a grown up lady aged 25 years, who left her husband on account of some dispute and was residing at her maternal village and has lodged FIR against the Respondent/accused belatedly i.e. on 22.12.2017 prior to which, she was maintaining physical relation with him. Even the medical examination (Ex.P-7) which was done on 01.12.2018 speaks volumes that there are no signs of any external injury, therefore, from the aforesaid evidence, no offence can be attracted in terms of Section 376 IPC. 9. In view of above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the trial Court has rightly acquitted the Respondent/accused, which is just and proper and does not warrant any interference with the findings recorded therein. 10. Consequently, the Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed at motion stage. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) JUDGE Priya