1 2025:CGHC:54018 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 556 of 2019 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Kunwakonda, District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Shamim Ahmad S/o Mushi Khan Aged About 31 Years R/o Village- Kandi, Post- Kotranka, Tahsil- Kotranka, Police Station- Kotranka, District- Rajouri, Jammu Kashmir. Present R/o G. Company 231, Palnar Camp, C.R.P.F. Dantewada, District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh 2 - Neeraj Kandwal S/o Late Dinesh Kandwal Aged About 35 Years R/o Mehuwala Khalsa, Post Office- Ambadi, Police Station- Vikas Nagar, District- Dehradun(Uttarakhand). Present Address 21 Battalion Headquarter Geedam, Police Station- Geedam, District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh., District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents/Accused Persons (Cause title as taken from Case Information System) For State/Appellant : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, Govt. Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2. : Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.11.10 18:03:54 +0530 2 06/11/2025 1. This acquittal appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘Cr.P.C.’) challenging the judgment dated 09.01.2019 passed by Special Judge (constituted under Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989), South Bastar, District Dantewada in Special Case No.05/2017 whereby, respondents have been acquitted of the charges under Section 354/34(16 times), 354(A)/34 (16 times) of IPC and Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 1912 (15 times) and under Section 3(1)(xi) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (08 times). 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/State submits that though written complaint (Ex.P/18) and FIR (Ex.P/19) were against unknown persons, but in identification parade, vide Ex.P/2, 04 minor victim girls have identified the respondents and they have also identified the respondents in Court at the time of their deposition, but the learned Special Court has acquitted the respondents holding therein that the identification of the respondents has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, hence, he prayed that the appeal may be admitted for hearing. 3. Per contra learned counsel appearing for the respondents has supported the impugned judgment. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. The written compliant and the FIR were against the unknown persons. In the statements of the minor victim girls recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., they have not named the respondents. Since the report was against the unknown persons, therefore, respondents were got identified from minor victim girls by placing photographs of 201 CRPF persons who are alleged to have molested minor victim girls and as per Ex.P/2, minor victim girls PW-1, PW-6, PW-9 & PW-14 have identified the respondents, but no physical identification parade of the respondents has been conducted. 6. As per deposition of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-9, PW-13 & PW-14, when they were coming from washroom, at that time the respondents, who are security persons of CRPF, searched them by touching their body. Minor victim girls are aged about 8 to 13 years. “j{kkca/ku dk;Zdze & j{kk dh Mksj” was being held at premises of Potacabin School, Palnar, District Dantewada, which is highly naxalite area. None of the minor victim girls has stated anything that apart from checking them, any of the respondents had touched them with sexual intent or with intention to molest them. Minor victim girl PW-1 has specifically stated in her deposition that while returning from washroom, respondents called them by saying “ csVk b/kj vkvks”. Minor victim girl PW-2 has further stated that “psfdax djus ds ckn mlus cksyk fd tkvks”. Having considered such address 4 made by the respondents who are security persons of CRPF and further considering the fact that since the place of incident is highly Naxalite area, having thought of the fact that minor victim girls would have kept some objectionable thing with them, the security persons checked them and from the deposition minor victim girls no sexual intent or intention to molest them is found against the respondents, then in such situation only because of alleged checking made by respondents, it is not established that the respondents checked the minor victim girls or touched their body with sexual intent or with intention to molest them. 7. In view of the above, I do not find any good ground to admit the appeal, hence, the instant Acquittal Appeal is deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 8. Let copy of this judgment along with record of the Court below be sent back forthwith. 9. Pending Interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ravi Mandavi