1 2025:CGHC:57720-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 294 of 2018 State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Incharge Police Station Chhuikhadan, District- Rajnandgaon (CG) ... Appellant versus Krishna Nageshwar @ Hiru @ Rahul S/o Shri Tikam Singh Nageshwar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o- Village Sandi, Police Station- Chhuikhadan, District- Rajnandgaon (CG) ---- Respondent For Appellant/State : Mr. Sachhidanand Yadav, Panel Lawyer For Respondent : None, though served Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board. 27.11.2025 Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 09.10.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon in SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.11.28 10:28:58 +0530 2 Special Case No.09/2016, whereby, the respondent- Krishna Nageshwar @ Hiru @ Rahul has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376(2)(j)(n) of IPC, read with Section 5(l)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. From perusal of the record, it appears that a report was lodged by the grand-mother of the prosecutrix on 12.05.2016 before the Police Station- Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, alleging inter alia, that on 06.05.2016, someone has abducted her grand-daughter, the prosecutrix and, based upon which, an offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC was registered and during the course of investigation, she was recovered from the possession of the respondent in his house at village Sandi, Tehsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon vide Ex.P-3, on 18.05.2016 and she was thereafter, examined by Dr. Leela Ramtake (PW-6) and after recovery of the undergarments and slide of the prosecutrix as well as the undergarment of the respondent, the same were sent for chemical examination, where, no human sperm was found on those articles and, after completion of the usual investigation, the respondent has been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence mentioned herein-above. 3. In order to establish the alleged allegations, the prosecutrix was examined as PW-7 and from perusal of her testimony, it appears that she was not taken away by the respondent from Chhuikhadan Bus Stand to Rajnandgaon, nor has gone with him to Nagpur, nor the respondent has made any physical relation with her. Further of her testimony would reveal the fact that on the said fateful day, she had, in 3 fact, gone to Dongargarh along with her friends. It, thus, appears from her testimony that she was neither abducted by the respondent, nor any physical relation was made by him with her, as alleged by the prosecution and, instead was found to be gone to Dongargarh along with her friends, therefore, under such circumstances and in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence led by the prosecution, it cannot be said that the respondent has committed the alleged offence on the said fateful day, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 4. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Judge sunita